J&S 

f 

(0 

IE 

Q. 

* 

-a 
res 

^* 

IE 

£S                1-3 

a. 

v 

M— 

O 

ta 

£ 

***         fc 

<u 

c 

*S5             ^ 

< 

t^            § 

~q3 

fe 

E 

^        •*        \j 

CO 

Is?      J       1 
.6        *       .§ 

^              fc 

3       *       3 

Hi 

2 

& 

>*. 

-Q 

& 

T3 

% 

<1) 

C 

& 

CO 

^ 

i 

S>c 

^0 

,A 

S3. 

iesz\* 


AN 


E  S  SAY, 


ON   THE 


WARRANT,  NATURE  AND   DUTIES 


OF    THE   OFFICE   OF   THE 


RULING    ELDER, 


IN  THE 


PRESBYTERIAN   CHURCH. 


BY  SAMUELyMXLL.ER>  D.  D. 

PROFESSOR  OF  ECCLESIASTICAL  HISTORY  AND  CHURCH   GOVERN- 
MENT IN  THE  THEOLOGICAL  SEMINARY 
AT  PRINCETON,  N.  J. 


SECOND   EDITION, 


'W 


NEW- YORK  : 

JONATHAN    LEAVITf. 

BOSTON  ; 
CROCKER  &  BREWSTER. 


1832; 


Entered  according  to  the  act  of  Ccngree?,  in  the  year  J832, 
by  SAMUEL  MILLER,  in  the  Clerk's  office  of  the  District 
of  New- Jersey. 


D'HaetA  Connoli.t,  Printers, 
Princeton,  A".  J. 


THE    MINISTERS    AND    ELDER 


OF  THE 

SRESBYTERIAK   CHURCH, 

IN  THE 

UNITED  STATES. 

Reverend  and  Respected  Brethren, 

The  substance  of  the  following  Essay  was 
delivered,  from  the  Pulpit,  in  the  form  of  a 
Sermon,  more  than  twenty  years  ago,  and 
subsequently  published.  In  consequence  of 
repeated  solicitation,  from  some  individuals  of 
your  number,  I  have  thought  proper  to  alter 
its  form,  to  enlarge  its  limits,  and  to  adapt  it, 
according  to  my  best  judgment,  to  more  ge- 
neral utility.  It  has  long  appeared  to  me  that 
a  more  ample  discussion  of  this  subject  than 
I  have  hitherto  seen,  is  really  needed.  And 
if  the  present  volume  should  be  considered  as, 
in  any  tolerable  degree,  answering  the  desired 
purpose,  I  shall  feel  myself  richly  rewarded  for 
the  labor  which  has  attended  its  preparation. 

Such  as  it  is,  my  venerated  Friends,  I  in- 
scribe it,  most  respectfully,  to  you.     My  first 


w. 


prayer  in  regard  to  it,  is,  that  it  may  be  the; 
means  of  doing  some  good  :  my  next,  that  it 
may  he  received  by  those  whom  I  have  so  much 
reason  to  respect  and  love,  as  a  well  intended 
effort  to  benefit  the  Church  of  God. 

I  am  aware  that  some  of  my  Brethren  do  not 
concur  with  me  in  maintaining  the  Divine  au- 
thority  of  the  office  of  the  Ruling  Elder;  and, 
probably,  in  several  other  opinions  respecting 
this  office  advanced  in  the  following  pages.  In 
reference  to  these  points,  I  can  only  say,  that, 
as  the  original  publication,  of  which  this  is  an 
enlargement,  was  made  without  the  remotest 
thought  of  controversy,  and  even  without  ad- 
verting, in  my  own  mind,  to  the  fact,  that  I 
differed  materially  from  any  of  my  Brethren; 
so  nothing  is  more  foreign  from  my  wishes,  in 
the  republication,  than  to  assail  the  opinions  or 
feelings  of  any  Brother.  I  have  carefully  re- 
examined the  whole  subject.  And,  although, 
in  doing  this,  I  have  been  led  to  modify  some 
of  my  former  opinions,  in  relation  to  a  few 
minor  points ;  yet  in  reference  to  the  Divine 
warrant  and  the  great  importance  of  the  Office 
for  which  I  plead,  my  convictions  have  become 
stronger  than  ever.  The  following  sheets  ex- 
hibit  those  views,  and  that  testimony  in  support 


of  them,  which  at  present,  satisfy  my  own  mind, 
and  which  I  feel  confident  may  be  firmly  sus- 
tained.   How  far,  however,  the  considerations 
which  have  satisfied   me,  may  impress  more 
impartial  judges,  I  cannot  venture  to  foretel. 
All  that  I  dare  to  ask  in  their  behalf  is,  that 
they  may  be  seriously  and  candidly  weighed. 
But  there  is  one  point  in  regard  to  which  I 
anticipate  no  diversity  of  opinion.     If  the  state- 
ment given  in  the  following  Essay,  concerning 
the  duties  incumbent  on  Ruling  Elders,  be 
correct,  it  is  certain  that  very  inadequate  views 
of  those  duties,  have    been   too  often   taken, 
both  by  those  who  conferred,  and  those  who 
sustained  the  office;   and  that  there  is  a  mani- 
fest and  loud  call  for  an  attempt  to  raise  the 
standard   of  public  sentiment  in  reference  to 
the  whole  subject.     That  we  make  so  little  of 
this  Office,  compared  with  what  we  might  do, 
and  ought  to   do,  docs  really  appear  to   me 
one  of  the  deepest  deficiencies  of  our  beloved 
Church.     That  a.  reform  in  this  respect  is  de- 
sirable, is  to  express  but  Half  the  truth.     It  is 
necessary;  it  is  vital.    .It  has  pleased  the  so- 
vereign Disposer,  to  cast  our  lot  in  a  period  of 
mighty  plan?,  and  of  high  moral  effort,  for  the 

benefit  of  tho  world.     In  the  subject  of  this 

a  2 


VI. 


volume,  I  am  inclined  to  think,  is  wrapped  tup 
one  of  those  means  which  are  destined,  under 
His  blessing,  to  he  richly  productive  of  moral 
energy  in  the  enterprises  of  Christian  benevo- 
lence, which  appear  to  be  every  day  gathering 
strength.  When  the  Rulers  of  the  Church 
shall,  in  the  genuine  spirit  of  the  humble, 
faithful  and  laborious  Paul,  "  magnify  their 
office  ;  when  they  shall  be  found  cordially  and 
diligently  co-operating  with  those  who  "  labor 
in  the  word  and  doctrine,"  in  inspecting,  coun- 
selling and  watching  over  the  "  flocks"  re- 
spectively  committed  to  their  "  oversight  in  the 
Lord ;"  and  when  they  shall  be  suitably  honored 
and  employed,  in  their  various  appropriate 
functions,  both  by  Pastors  and  People;  this 
change  will,  I  believe,  be,  at  once,  one  of  the 
surest  precursors,  and  one  of  the  most  efficient 
means,  of  the  introduction  of  brighter  days  ia 
the  Church  of  God. 

So  far  as  we  can  anticipate  events,  this  im- 
portant change  must  begin  with  the  Teachers. 
and  Rulers  of  the  Church  themselves.  On 
every  one  of  You,  therefore,  if  my  estimate  of 
the  subject  be  correct,  devolves  a  high  and  most 
interesting  responsibility.  That  you  may  have 
grace  given  you  to  acquit  yourselves  of  this, 


Vll. 


responsibility,  in  a  manner  acceptable  to  our 

common  Master,  and  conducive  to  the  signal 

advancement  of  his  kingdom;  and  that  future 

generations,  both  in  the  Church  and  out  of  it, 

may   have   reason  to    "rise   up  and  call   you 

blessed,"  is  the  fervent  prayer  of, 

Reverend  and  Respected  Brethren, 

Your  friend  and  fellow-servant 

in  the  house  of  God, 

SAMUEL  MILLER. 

Princeton^      } 
April  20,  1831. 


CONTENTS 


CHAPTER  I. 

Introductory  Remarks — Nature  of  the  Church — Visible  and 
Invisible  Church — Unity  of  the  Church — A  form  of  govern- 
ment for  the  Church  appointed  by  Christ — Nature  and  limits 
of  ecclesiastical  power — Summary  of  the  doctrine  of  Presby- 
terians on  this  subject — The  proper  classes  of  officers  in  a 
Church  completely  organized — Positions  intended  to  be  esta- 
blished, as  affording  a  warrant  for  the  office  of  Ruling  Elders. — 
page  13—30. 

CHAPTER  II. 

Testimony  from  the  order  of  the  Old  Testament  Church — 
Import  of  the  term  Elder — Specimen  of  the  representations 
given  of  this  class  of  officers — Elders  of  the  Synagogue — 
Authorities  in  reference  to  the  government  of  the  Synagogue — - 
The  titles,  duties,  number,  mode  of  sitting,  &c.,  of  the  Elders 
of  the  Synagogue — Quotations  from  distinguished  writers 
on  this  subject — Burnet — Goodwin — Lightfoot — Slit  ling  fleet— 
Grotius — Spencer — Clark — Neander. — p.  31 — 43. 

CHAPTER  III. 

Evidence  from  the  New  Testament  Scriptures — Model  of 
the  Synagogue  transferred  to  the  Church — Specimen  of  the 
passages  which  speak  of  the  New  Testament  Elders — Particular 
texts  which  establish  the  existence  of  this  class  of  Elders  in  the 
primitive  Church — Objections  to  our  construction  of  these 
passages — Answered. — p.  49 — 72. 

CHAPTER  IV. 
Testimony  of  the  Christian  Fathers — Clemens  Romanics — Ig- 
natius— Polycarp — Cyprian — Origen — Gesta  Purgationis,  Sic, 


Optatus — Ambrose — Augustine — Apostolical  Constitutions — Iso- 
dore — Gregory — Facts  incidentally  staled  by  the  Fathers 
concerning- some  oftheElders — Syrian  Christians. — p. 73 — 105, 

CHAPTER  V. 

Testimony  of  the  Witnesses  for  the  Truth  in  the  Dark 
Ages, —  Waldenses — Albigenses — Bohemian  Churches — Calvir* 
derived  this  feature  in  his  ecclesiastical  system  from  the  Bohe- 
mian Brethren.— p.  106—119. 

CHAPTER  VI. 

Testimony  of  the  Reformers — Zuingfe — Oecolampad'ms — 
Bucer — Peter  Marlyt — John  A  Lasco— Calvin — WhUgifl — 
Dean  JVbwell — Ursinus — Confession  of  Saxony — Szegedcn — 
Magdeburgh  Centuriators — Junius — Zanchius — Parous — Pis- 
cator — Cartwight — Green ham—  Estius — Whitaker — Ruling  El- 
ders generally  established  in  the  Reformed  Churches. — p.  IZO 
—144. 

CHAPTER  VII. 

Testimony  of  eminent  divines  since  the  Reformation — Owen 
— Baxter — English    Puritans — of  New-England — Goodwin — 

Hooker — Cotton — Davenport Thorndikc — Cotton  Matlier — 

Edwards — Kromayer — Baldwin — Suicer — Whitby — Watts- — 
Doddridge — Nea.nd.er — D.wight. — p.  1 45 — 17 1 . 

CHAPTER  VIII. 

Ruling  Elders  necessary  in  the  Church; — The  importance 
of  Discipline  to  the  purity  of  ihe  Church — Discipline  cannot 
be  maintained  without  this  class  of  officers,  or  persons  of 
equivalent  powers — The  Pastor  alone  cannot  maintain  it — 
The  whole  body  of  the  Church  cannot  conduct  it  in  a  wise  and 
happy  manner — Prelatists  and  Independents  both  obliged  to. 
provide  substitutes  for  them — This  provision,  however,  inade- 
quate.—p.  172—191. 

CHAPTER  IX. 

Nature  of  the  Ruling  Elder's  office — Analogy  between  their 
office  and  that  of  secular  rulers — Their  duties  as  members  of 
the  Church  Session — Their  more  private  and  constant  duties 
as  "  overseers"  of  the  Church — Their  duties  as  members  of 
hjgher  judicatories — Question  discussed   whether  they  ought 


X.  INDEX. 

to  be  called  %-Elders— Duties  of  the  Church  members  to 
their  Elders— Elders  ought  to  have  a  particular  seat  assigned 
them.— p.  192—215. 

CHAPTER  X. 
Distinction  between  the  office  of  Ruling  Elder  and  Deacon— 
The  persons  whose  appointment  to  take  care  of  the  poor  is  re- 
corded in  the  sixth  chapter  of  the  Acts  of  the  Apostles,  were 
the  first  Deacons — The  question  discussed,  whether  they  were 
Deacons  at  all— Whether  the  first  Deacons  were  preachers 
and  baptizers? — Deacons  were  never  ecclesiastical  Rulers — 
The  office  of  Deacon  dropped  by  many  Presbyterian  Churches 
—The  offices  of  Ruling  Elder  and  Deacon  united  in  the  same 
men,  in  Scotland  and  the  United  States — This  not  desirable- 
Reasons  for  this  opinion. — p.  216 — 243. 

CHAPTER  XI. 

The  qualifications  proper  for  the  office  of  Ruling  Elder — 
It  is  not  necessary  that  they  be  aged  persons — It  is  of  the 
utmost  importance  that  they  have  unfeigned  and  approved 
piety — That  they  possess  good  sense,  and  sound  judgment — 
That  they  be  orthodox,  and  well  informed  in  gospel  truth — 
That  they  have  eminent  prudence — That  they  he  of  good  report 
among  them  who  are  without — That  they  be  men  of  public 
spirit — That  they  be  men  of  ardent  zeal  and  importunate 
prayer. — p.  244 — 259. 

CHAPTER  XII. 

Of  the  election  of  Ruling  Elders — Who  are  proper  Elec- 
tors?— Ought  they  to  be  elected  for  life,  or  only  for  a  limited 
time? — Of  the  number  of  Elders  proper  for  each  Church — Of 
those  who  may  be  considered  as  eligible  to  this  office — Whether 
a  man  may  be  a  Ruling  Elder  in  more  than  one  Church  at  the 
same  time. — p.  260 — 274. 

CHAPTER  XIII. 

Of  the  ordination  of  Ruling  Elders — Ordination  a  necessary 
designation  to  office — Proofs  from  Scripture — The  laying  on 
of  hands — Not  always  connected  with  the  special  gifts  of  the 
Spirit — This  ceremony  ought  to  be  employed  in  the  ordination 
of  Ruling  Elders— Probable  reason  of  its  falling  into  disuse — 
Authorities  in  favor  of  its  restoration— -> Who  ought  to  lay  on 


INDEX.  Xi. 

M 

hands  in  the  Ordination  of  Elders — Advantages  of  imposing 
•hands  in  ordaining-  this  class  of  officers. — p.  275 — 293. 

CHAPTER  XIV. 
On  the  resignation  of  Ruling  Elders — Their  removal  from 
one  Church  to  another — The  method  of  conducting  discipline 
against  them. — p.  294 — 301. 

CHAPTER  XV. 

The  advantages  of  conducting  discipline  upon  the  Presby- 
terian plan — It  is  founded  on  the  principle  of  Representation — 
It  presents  one  of  the  best  barriers  against  Clerical  ambition 
and  encroachments — Furnishes  one  of  the  best  securities  for 
preserving  the  rights  of  the  people — Furnishes  to  Ministers 
efficient  counsel  and  support — Favorable  to  despatch  and  energy 
— Accomplishes  that  which  cannot  be  attained  in  any  other 
way — Favorable  to  union  and  cooperation  in  enterprizes  of 
Christian  benevolence. — p.  302—322. 


AN  ESSAY,  *- 


CHAPTER  I> 

INTRODUCTORY. 

Our  once  crucified,  but  now  exalted  Redeemer,  has 
'erected  in  this  world  a  kingdom  which  is  his  Church. 
This  Church  is  either  visible  or  invisible. 

By  the  invisible  Church  we  mean,  the  whole  body 
of  sincere  believers,  of  every  age  and  nation,  "  that  have 
been,  are,  or  shall  be  gathered  into  one^  under  Christ, 
the  glorious  Head  thereof."  Part  of  these  are  already 
made  perfect  in  heaven.  Another  portion  are  at  present 
scattered  over  the  earth  in  different  denominations  of 
professing  Christians,  though  not  certainly  distinguish- 
able from  others  by  the  human  eye.  And  the  remainder 
are  in  future  to  be  gathered  in  by  the  grace  of  God ; — 
when  the  whole  number  of  the  "redeemed  from  among 
men,"  will  be  united  in  one  holy  assembly,  which  is 
the  "  spouse,"  the  "  body  of  Christ,  the  fulness  of  Him 
that  filleth  all  in  all." 

By  the  visible  Church  is  meant  the  body  of  those 
who  -profess  the  true  religion,  together  with  their 
children.  It  is  that  body  which  is  called  out  of  the 
world,  and  united  under  the  authority  of  Christ,  the 
Head,  for  the  purpose  of  maintaining  Gospel  Truth 
and  Order,   and  promoting   the  knowledge,   purity, 

B 


14  INTRODUCTORY. 

comfort  and  edification  of  all  the  members.  When 
we  use  the  term  Church,  as  expressive  of  a  visible, 
professing  body,  we  either  mean  the  whole  visible 
Church  of  God  throughout  the  world,  or  a  particular 
congregation  of  professing  Christians,  who  have  agreed 
to  unite  together  for  the  purpose  of  mutual  instruction, 
inspection  and  edification.* 

The  word  Church  is  also  employed  in  Scripture  to 
designate  a  Church  Judicatory ;  that  is,  the  Church 
assembled  and  acting  by  her  representatives,  the 
Elders,  chosen  to  inspect,  and  bear  rule  over  the  whole 
body.  This,  it  is  believed,  will  be  evident  to  those 
who  impartially  consult  Matthew  xviii.  15 — 18 ;  and 
compare  the  language  of  the  original  here,  with  that 
of  the  original,  and  the  Greek  translation  of  the  Seventy, 
of  Deuteronomy  xxxi.  28 — 30. 

The  visible  Church  is  a  spiritual  body.  That  is; 
it  is  not  secular  or  worldly,  either  in  its  nature  or 

*  It  has  been  asserted  by  some,  that  the  term  Church,  not  only 
means,  strictly,  a  religious  assembly — a  body  of  professing  peo- 
ple ;  but  that  it  cannot  be  applied,  with  propriety,  to  any  thing 
else;  and  that  it  is  altogether  improper  to  apply  it,  as  is  often 
done,  to  the  building  in  which  the  assembly  is  wont  to  convene 
forw7orship.  This  is,  undoubtedly,  a  groundless  scruple.  Under 
the  Old  Testament  economy,  it  is  plain  that  the  word  synagogue 
was  indiscriminately  applied  both  to  the  public  assembly,  and 
to  the  edifice  in  which  they  worshipped.     Besides,  t&e  word 
Church  is  evidently  derived  from  the  Greek  words,  **&v  oms, 
"  the  house  of  the  Lord  ;"  and  therefore,  may  be  considered 
as  pointing  quite  as  distinctly  to  the  edifice  as  to  the  wor- 
shippers.    Nay,  it  is  highly  probable  that  the  word  in  its 
original  use,  had  a  primary  reference  to  the  house  rather  than 
to  the  assembly.     And  even  if  it  were  not  so,  still  the  under- 
standing- and  use  of  the  word  in  this  double  sense,  if  once  agreed 
upon,  cannot  be  considered  as  liable,  so  far  as  is  perceived,  to 
any  particular  objection  or  abuse. 


INTRODUCTORY.  15 

objects.  The  kingdom  of  Christ  "is  not  of  this  world." 
Its  Head,  laws,  ordinances,  discipline,  penalties,  and 
end,  are  all  spiritual.  There  can  be  no  departure 
from  this  principle;  in  other  words,  there  can  be  no 
connexion  between  the  Church  and  the  State ;  no 
enforcement  of  ecclesiastical  laws  by  the  power  of  the 
secular  arm,  or  by  "carnal  weapons,"  without  departing 
from  "the  simplicity  that  is  in  Christ."  and  invading 
both  the  purity  and  safety  of  his  sacred  body. 

This  great  visible  Church  is  o?ic,  in  all  ages,  and 
throughout   the   world.     From  its  first  formation   in 
the  family  of  Ada??i,  through  all  the  changes  of  the 
Patriarchal,   Mosaic   and   Christian  dispensations,    it 
has  been  one  and  the  same ;  having  the  same  divine 
Head,  the  same  ground  of  Hope,  the  same  essential 
characters,  and  the  same  great  design.     Diversity  of 
denomination  does  not  destroy  this  unity.     All  who 
profess  the  true  religion,  together  with  tkeir  offspring, 
however  divided  by  place,  by  names,  or  by  forms,  are 
to  be  considered  as  equally  belonging   to  that  great 
family  denominated  the  Church.     The  Presbyterian, 
the  Episcopalian,  the  Methodist,  the  Baptist,  and  the 
Independent,  who  hold  the  fundamentals  of  our  holy 
religion,  in  whatever  part  of  the  globe  they  may  reside, 
are  all  equally  members  of  the  same  visible  community ; 
and,  if  they  be  sincere,  will  all  finally  be  made  partakers 
of  its  eternal   blessings.     They   cannot,   indeed,   all 
worship  together  in  the  same  solemn  assembly,  even 
if  they  were  disposed  to  do  so: — and  the  sin  and  folly 
of  men  have  separated  into  different  bodies  those  who 
ought  to  "  walk  together."     Still  the  visible  Church  is 
one.     All  who  "hold  the  Head,"  of  course,  belong  to 
the  body  of   Christ.     "Wo,  being  many,"  says   the 
inspired  Apostle,  "  are  one  body  in  Christ,  and  every 


16  INTRODUCTORY. 

one  members  one  of  another."  Those  who  are  united 
by  a  sound  profession  to  the  same  almighty  Head : 
who  embrace  the  same  "precious  faith:"  who  are  sanc- 
tified by  the  same  Spirit :  who  eat  the  same  spiritual 
meat ;  who  drink  the  same  spiritual  drink ;  who 
repose  and  rejoice  in  the  same  promises ;  and  who  are 
travelling  to  the  same  eternal  rest — are  surely  one 
body. — in  a  sense  more  richly  significant  than  can 
be  ascribed  to  millions  who  sustain  a  mere  nominal 
unity. 

This  unity  is  very  distinctly  recognized,  and  very 
happily  expressed;  by  Cyprian,  a  distinguished  Chris- 
tian Father  of  the  third  century.  ':  The  Church,"  says 
he,  "  is  (me,  wThich,  by  its  fruitful  increase,  is  enlarged 
into  a  multitude.  As  the  rays  of  the  sun,  though  many, 
are  yet  one  luminary ;  as  the  branches  of  a  tree,  though 
numerous,  are  all  established  on  one  firmly  rooted 
trunk  ;  and  fis  many  streams  springing  from  the  same 
fountain,  though  apparently  dispersed  abroad  by  their 
overflowing  abundance,  yet  have  their  unity  preserved 
by  one  common  origin : — so  the  Church,  though  it 
extends  its  rays  throughout  the  world,  is  one  Light, 
Though  every  where  diffused,  its  unity  is  not  broken. 
By  the  abundance  of  its  increase,  it  extends  its  branches 
through  the  whole  earth.  It  spreads  far  and  wide  its 
flowing  streams;  yet  it  has  one  Head;  one  Fountain: 
one  Parent ;  and  is  enriched  and  enlarged  by  the  issues 
of  its  own  fruitfulness.*7* 

It  is  ever  also  to  be  borne  in  mind  that  the  Church 
is  not  a  mere  voluntary  association,  with  which  men 
are  at  liberty  to  connect  themselves  or  not,  as  they 
please.     For,  although  the  service  which  God  requires 

*  Be  Unitale  Ecelesice.     Sect,  i?, 


INTRODUCTORY.  17 

of  us  is  throughout  a  voluntary  one :  although  no  one 
can  properly  come  into  the  Church  but  as  a  matter  of 
voluntary  choice:  although  the  idea  of  either  secular  or 
ecclesiastical  compulsion  is,  here,  at  once  unreasonable 
and  contrary  to  Scripture:  yet  as  the  Church  is  Christ's 
institution,  and  not  men's ;  and  as  the  same  divine 
authority  which  requires  us  to  repent  of  sin,  and 
believe  in  Christ,  also  requires  us  to  "confess  him 
before  men,"  and  to  join  ourselves  to  his  professing 
people ;  it  is  evident  that  no  one  is  at  liberty,  in  the 
sight  of  God,  to  neglect  uniting  himself  with  the 
Church.  Man  cannot,  and  ought  not,  to  compel  him; 
but  if  he  refuse  to  fulfil  this  duty,  when  it  is  in  his 
power,  he  rejects  the  authority  of  God.  He,  of  course, 
refuses  at  his  peril. 

Of  this  body,  Christ  alone,  as  before  intimated,  is  the 
Head.  He  only  has  a  right  to  give  laws  to  his  Church, 
or  to  institute  rites  and  ordinances  for  her  observance. 
His  will  is  the  supreme  guide  of  his  professing  people ; 
his  Word  their  code  of  laws;  and  his  glory  their  ultimate 
end.  The  authority  of  Church  officers  is  not  original, 
but  subordinate  and  delegated :  that  is,  as  they  are 
his  servants,  and  act  under  his  commission,  and  in  his 
name,  they  have  power  only  to  declare  what  the 
Scriptures  reveal  as  his  will,  and  to  pronounce  sentence 
accordingly.  If  they  attempt  to  establish  any  other 
terms  of  communion  than  those  which  his  word  war- 
rants; or  to  undertake  to  exercise  authority  in  a  manner 
which  He  has  not  authorised,  they  incur  guilt,  and 
have  no  right  to  exact  obedience. 

In  this  sacred  community,  Government  is  absolutely 
necessary.  Even  in  the  perfectly  holy  and  harmonious 
society  of  heaven,  there  is  government ;  that  is,  there 
is  law  and  authority,  under  which  the  whole  celestial 

b  2 


13  INTRODUCTORY. 

family  is  united  in  perfect  love,  and  unmingled  enjoy- 
ment. Much  more  important  and  indispensable  is 
government  among  fallen  depraved  men,  among  whom 
"  it  is  impossible  but  that  offences  will  come/'  and  to 
whom  the  discipline  of  scriptural  and  pure  ecclesiastical 
rule,  is  one  of  the  most  precious  means  of  grace.  To 
think  of  maintaining  any  society,  ecclesiastical  or  civil, 
without  government,  in  this  depraved  world,  would  be 
to  contradict  every  principle  of  reason  and  experience, 
as  well  as  of  Scripture:  and  to  think  of  supporting 
government  without  officers,  to  whom  its  functions 
maybe  intrusted,  would  be  to  embrace  the  absurd  hope 
of  obtaining  an  end  without  the  requisite  means. 

The  question.  Whether  any  particular  form  of  Church 

government  is  so  laid  down  in  Scripture,  as  that  the 

claim  of  divine  right  may  be  advanced  on  its  behalf, 

and  that,  of  consequence,  the  Church  is  bound,  in  all 

ages,  to  adopt  and  act   upon   it ; — will   not  now  be 

formally  discussed.     It  has  been  made  the  subject  of 

too   much   extended   and   ardent  controversy,    to   be 

brought  within  the  compass  of  a  few  sentences,  or  even 

a  few  pages.    It  may  not  be  improper,  however,  briefly 

to  say,  that  it  would,  indeed,  have  been  singular,  if  a 

community,  called   out  of  the  world,  and  organized 

under  the  peculiar  authority  of  the  all-wise  Redeemer^ 

had   been  left  entirely  without  any  direction   as  to 

its  government: — That  the  Scriptures,  undoubtedly  7 

exhibit  to  us  a  form  of  ecclesiastical  organization  and 

rule,  which  was,  in  fact,  instituted  by  the  Apostles, 

under  the  direction  of  infinite  Wisdom : — That  this 

form  was  evidently  taken,  with  very  little  alteration, 

from  the  preceding  Economy,  thus  giving  additional 

presumption  in  its   favor: — That  we  find  the  same 

plan  closely  copied  by  the  churches  for  a  considerable 


INTRODUCTORY.  19 

time  after  the  apostolic  age: — That  it  continued  to  be  in 
substance  the  chosen  and  universal  form  of  government 
in  (he  Church,  until  corruption,  both  in  doctrine  and 
practice,  had,  through  the  ambition  and  degeneracy  of 
ecclesiastics,  gained  a  melancholy  prevalence: — And, 
that  the  same  form  was  also  substantially  maintained 
by  the  most  faithful  witnesses  for  the  truth,  during  the 
dark  ages, — until  the  great  body  of  the  Reformers  took 
it  from  their  hands,  and  established  it  in  their  respective 
ecclesiastical  connexions. 

These  premises  would  appear  abundantly  to  warrant 

the  conclusion,  that  the  form  of  Government  which 

answers  this  description,  is  the  wisest  and  best ;  that 

it  is  adapted  to  all  ages  and  states  of  society;  and  that 

it  is  agreeable  to  the  will  of  Christ  that  it  be  universally 

received  in  his  Church.     All   this  the  writer  of  the 

following  Essay  fully  believes  may  be  established  in 

favor  of  Presbyterianism.      There   seems  no  reason, 

however,  to  believe,  with  some  zealous  votaries  of  the 

hierarchy,  that  any  particular  form  of  government  is  in 

so  rigorous  a  sense  of  divine  right,  as  to  be  essential 

to  the  existence  of  the  Church ;  so  that  where  this  form 

is  wanting,  there  can  be  no  Church.     To  adopt  this 

opinion,  is  to  take  a  very  narrow  and  unscriptural  view 

of  the  covenant  of  grace.     After  yielding  to  the  visible 

Church  and  its  ordinances,  all  the  importance  which  the 

word  of  God  warrants,  still  it  cannot  be  doubted,  that 

on  the  one  hand,  men  in  regular  external  membership 

with  the  purest  Church  on  earth,  may  be  hypocrites, 

and  perish ;  and  on  the  other,  that  all  who  cordially 

repent  of  sin,  and  receive  the  Saviour  in  spirit  and  in 

truth,  will  assuredly  obtain  eternal  life,  although  they 

never  enjoyed  the  privilege  of  a  connexion  with  any 

portion  of  the  visible  Church  on  earth.     The  tenor  of 


20  INTRODUCTORY. 

the  Gospel  covenant  is, — He  that  believeth  on  the  Son 
of  God  hath  eternal  life,  and  shall  not  come  into 
condemnation,  hut  is  passed  from  death  unto  life: 
but  lie  that  believeth  not  the  Son,  shall  not  see  life, 
but  the  wrath  of  God  abideth  on  him. 

Still  it  is  plain,  from  the  word  of  God.  as  well  as  from 
uniform  experience,  that  the  government  of  the  Church 
is  a  matter  of  great  importance;  that  the  form  as  well  a~ 
the  administration  of  that  government  is  more  vitally 
connected  with  the  peace,  purity  and  edification  of  the 
Church,  than  many  Christians  appear  to  believe;  and. 
of  consequence,  that  it  is  no  small  part  of  fidelity  to 
our  Master  in  heaven  to  "hold  fast"  the  form  of 
ecclesiastical  order,  as  well  as  the  "  form  of  sound 
words'"  which  He  has  delivered  to  the  saints. 

The  existence  of  ecclesiastical  Riders,  presupposes 
the  existence  and  exercise  of  ecclesiastical  power.  A 
few  remarks  on  the  nature,  source  and  limits  of  this 
power,  may  not  be  irrelevant  as  a  part  of  this  preliminary 
discussion. 

When  we  speak  of  ecclesiastical  poiver,  then,  we 
speak  of  that  which,  much  as  it  is  misunderstood,  and 
deplorably  as  it  has  been  perverted  and  abused,  is  plainly 
warranted,  both  by  reason  and  Scripture.  In  fact,  it  is 
a  prerogative  which  common  sense  assigns  and  secures 
to  all  organized  society,  from  a  family  to  a  nation.  The 
doctrine  attempted  to  be  maintained  by  the  celebrated 
Erastus,  in  his  work,  De  Excommunicatione,  viz: 
that  the  exercise  of  all  Church  power,  however  modified; 
is  to  be  rejected,  as  forming  an  imperium  in  imperio, 
is  one  of  the  most  weak  and  untenable  of  all  positions. 
The  same  argument  would  preclude  all  authority  or 
government  subordinate  to  that  of  the  State,  whether 


INTRODUCTORY.  21 

domestic,  academical,  or  financial.  The  truth  is,  there 
not  only  may  be,  but  there  actually  are  thousands 
of  imjjcria  in  imperio,  in  every  civil  community  in 
the  world ;  and  all  this  without  the  least  danger  or 
inconvenience,  as  long  as  the  smaller  or  subordinate 
governments  maintain  their  proper  place,  and  do  not 
claim,  or  attempt  to  exercise,  powers,  which  come  in 
collision  with  those  of  the  State. 

Now  the  power  exercised  by  the  Church  is  of  this 
character.  Christ  is  the  Sovereign.  His  kingdom  is 
spiritual.  It  interferes  not  with  civil  government.  It 
may  exist  and  flourish  under  any  form  of  political 
administration ;  and  always  fares  best  when  entirely  left 
to  itself,  without  the  interference  of  the  civil  magistrate. 
According^,  it  is  notorious,  that  the  power  of  which 
we  speak,  was  exercised  by  the  Church,  in  the  days 
of  the  Apostles,  and  during  the  first  three  centuries  of 
the  Christian  era,  not  only  without  any  aid  from  the 
secular  arm,  but  while  all  the  civil  governments  of  the 
world  were  firmly  leagued  against  her,  and  following 
her  with  the  bitterest  persecution.  But  the  moment 
the  Church  became  allied  with  the  State,  that  moment 
the  influence  of  each  on  the  other  became  manifestly 
mischievous.  The  State  enriched,  pampered  and 
corrupted  the  Church ;  and  the  Church,  in  her  turn, 
gradually  extended  her  power  over  the  State,  until  she 
claimed,  and  in  some  instances  gained,  a  haughty 
supremacy  over  all  rulers  and  governments.  This  is 
an  ecclesiastical  power  which  the  Bible  no  where 
recognizes  or  allows.  It  is  the  essence  of  spiritual 
usurpation ;  and  can  never  have  a  place  but  where 
the  essential  character  of  the  religion  of  Jesus  Christ 
is  misapprehended  or  forgotten.  This  abominable 
tyranny,  so  long  and  so  wickedly  maintained  in  the 


22  INTRODUCTORY. 

name  of  the  meek  and  lowly  Saviour,  who,  instead  of 
countenancing,  always  condemned  it; — has  prejudiced 
the  mind^of  many  against  ecclesiastical  power  in  any 
form.  On  account  of  this  prejudice  it  is  judged  proper 
to  state,  with  some  degree  of  distinctness,  what  we 
mean  when  we  speak  of  the  Church  of  Christ  as  being 
invested  with  power  for  the  benefit  of  her  members, 
and  for  the  glory  of  her  almighty  Head. 

It  is  evident  that  even  if  the  Church  were  a  mere 
voluntary  association,  which  neither  possessed  nor 
claimed  any  divine  warrant,  it  would  have  the  same 
powers  which  are  universally  conceded  to  all  other 
voluntary  associations;  that  is,  the  power  of  forming 
its  own  rules,  of  judging  of  the  qualifications  of  its 
own  members,  and  of  admitting  or  excluding,  as  the 
essential  principles  and  interests  of  the  body  might 
require  :  and  all  this  as  long  as  neither  the  rules 
themselves,  nor  the  execution  of  them,  infringed  the 
laws  of  the  State,  or  violated  any  public  or  private 
rights.  When  a  Literary,  Philosophical,  or  Agricultural 
Society  claims  and  exercises  powers  of  this  kind,  all 
reflecting  people  consider  it  as  both  reasonable  and 
safe;  and  would  no  more  think  of  denying  the  right 
to  do  so,  than  they  would  think  of  denying  that  the 
father  of  a  family  had  a  right  to  govern  his  own 
household,  as  long  as  he  neither  transgressed  any  law 
of  the  State,  nor  invaded  the  peace  of  his  neighbors. 

But  the  Christian  Church  is  by  no  means  to  be  con- 
sidered as  a  mere  voluntary  association.  It  is  a  Body 
called  out  of  the  world,  created  by  divine  institution, 
and  created,  as  its  members  believe,  for  the  express 
purpose  of  bearing  testimony  for  Christ,  in  the  midst 
of  a  revolted  and  rebellious  world,  and  maintaining  in 
their  purity  the  truth  and  ordinances  which  He  has 


INTRODUCTORY.  23 

appointed.  The  members  of  this  body,  therefore,  by 
the  act  of  uniting -themselves  with  it,  profess  to  believe 
certain  doctrines,  to  be  under  obligation  to  perform 
certain  duties,  and  to  be  bound  to  possess  a  certain 
character.  Of  course,  the  very  purpose  for  which,  and 
the  very  terms  on  which  the  Master  has  formed  this 
body,  and  bound  its  members  together,  necessarily 
imply,  not  only  the  right,  but  the  duty,  of  refusing  to 
admit  those  who  are  manifestly  hostile  to  the  essential 
principles  of  its  institution,  and  of  casting  out  those  who, 
after  their  admission,  as  manifestly  depart  from  those 
principles.  To  suppose  less  than  this,  would  be  to 
suppose  that  a  God  of  infinite  wisdom  has  withheld 
from  a  body,  formed  for  a  certain  purpose,  that  which 
is  absolutely  necessary  for  its  defence  against  intrusion, 
insult,  and  perversion;  in  other  words,  for  its  own 
preservation. 

Hence  the  Apostle  Paid,  after  the  New  Testament 
Church  was  erected,  speaks  (1  Cor.  xii.  28.)  of  "  go- 
vernments," as  well  as  "teachers"  being  "set  in  it"  by 
the  authority  of  God.     He  expressly  claims,  (2  Cor.  x. 
8.)  an  "authority"  which  God  had  given  to  his  servants 
as  rulers  in  the  Church,  "  for  edification,  and  not  for 
destruction."     And    he  exemplifies  this  authority  by 
representing  it  as  properly  exercised  in  casting  out  of 
the  Church,  any  one  who  was  immoral,  or  profane ; 
(1  Cor.  v.).  Hence  the  officers  of  the  Church  are  spoken 
of  as  "guides,"  (^youjut-svo/, )  "overseers,"  or  "'bishops" 
(witixoiroi)  and  "  rulers,"  (irgoefaureg :) — and  it  is  declared 
to  be  their  duty,  not  only  to  instruct,  warn,  and  entreat ; 
but  also  to  "  rebuke,"  or  authoritatively  to  admonish 
and  censure.    They  were  commanded  by  the  authority 
of  the  Head  of  the  Church  (1  Cor.  v.   Tit.  iii.  10.)  to 
"reject^'  to  "put  away  from  them,"  after  using  proper 


24  INTRODUCTORYv 

admonition,  those  who  were  grossly  heretical  or  im- 
moral. In  short,  in  that  period  of  gospel  simplicity, 
and  purity,  the  Church  claimed  no  authority  over  any 
but  her  own  members ;  and  even  over  them,  no  other 
authority  than  that  which  related  to  their  character, 
duties,  and  interests  as  members,  and  was  deemed 
essential  to  her  own  well-being. 

And  as  this  power  of  the  Church  is  not  self-created 
or  self-assumed,  but  derived  from  her  gracious  and 
almighty  Head ;  and  as  it  is,  and  can,  of  right,  only 
be,  exercised  over  her  own  members ;  so  it  is  merely 
spiritual  in  its  nature  ;  in  other  words,  it  claims  no 
right  whatever  to  inflict  temporal  pains  or  penalties. 
It  cannot  touch  the  persons  or  property  of  those  to 
whom  it  is  directed.  It  addresses  itself  only  to  their 
judgments  and  consciences.  It  includes  only  a  right  to 
instruct,  warn,  rebuke,  censure,  and  cast  out,  that  is,  to 
exclude  from  the  privileges  of  the  body.  This  last 
step,  is  the  utmost  length  to  which  it  can  go.  \\hen 
the  Church  has  excluded  from  her  pale  those  toward 
whom  this  power  is  directed  ;  in  other  words,  when 
she  has  declared  them  out  of  her  communion  or 
fellowship,  she  has  done  every  thing  to  which  her 
power  extends.  All  beyond  this  is  usurpation  and 
oppression.  The  great  end  of  Church  Government,  is 
not  to  employ  physical  force  ;  but  moral  weapons  only. 
It  can  never  invade  the  right  of  private  judgment.  It 
can  never  exert  its  power  over  any  but  those  who  volun- 
tarily submit  to  it.  And  it  prescribes  no  sanctions  but 
those  which  have  for  their  object  the  moral  benefit  of  the 
body  itself,  and  also  of  the  individuals  to  whom  they 
are  awarded.  The  gospel  knows  nothing  of  delivering 
men  over  to  the  secular  arm,  to  be  punished  for  offences 
against  the  Church.     The  Church  might,  therefore, 


INTRODUCTORY.  25 

.  <exert  her  whole  power,  in  its  plenary  extent,  though 
all  the  governments  of  the  world  were  arrayed  against 
her  in  the  bitterest  hostility,  as  they  have  once  been, 
and  as  they  may  again  be  found. 

And,  as  all  the  power  of  the  Church  is  derived,  not 
from  the  civil  government,  but  from  Christ,  the  al- 
mighty King  of  Zion  ;  and  as  it  is  purely  spiritual  in 
its  nature  and  sanctions ;  so  the  pqwer  of  Church 
Officers  is  merely  ministerial.  They  are,  strictly, 
servants^  who  are  to  be  governed,  in  all  things,  by  the 
pleasure  of  their  employer.  They  have  only  authority 
to  announce  what  the  Master  has  said,  and  to  decide 
agreeably  to  that  will  which  he  has  made  known  in 
his  word.  Like  ambassadors  at  a  foreign  court,  they 
cannot  go  one  jot  or  tittle  beyond  their  instructions. 
Of  course,  they  have  no  right  to  set  up  a  law  of  their 
own.  The  Bible  is  the  great  Statute-Book  of  the  body 
of  which  we  speak;  the  only  infallible  rule  of  faith  and 
practice.  And  nothing  can  be  rightfully  inculcated  on 
the  members  of  the  Churchy  as  truth,  or  demanded  of 
them,  as  duty,  but  that  which  is  found  in  that  great 
charter  of  the  privileges  as  well  as  the  obligations  of 
Christians. 

To  complete  the  view  of  that  ecclesiastical  power 
which  we  consider  as  implied  in  Church  government, 
it  is  only  necessary  to  add,  that  it  is  given  solely  for  the 
benefit  of  the  Church,  and  not  for  the  aggrandizement 
of  Church  Officers.  Tyrants  in  civil  government  have 
taught,  and  acted  upon  the  principle,  that  the  great  end 
of  all  political  establishments,  is  the  exaltation  of  a  few 
at  the  expense  of  the  many.  And  it  is  deeply  to  be 
deplored  that  the  same  principle  has  been  too  often  ap- 
parently adopted  by  bodies  calling  themselves  Churches 
of  Christ.     Nothing  can  be  more  opposite  than  this,  to 

c 


26  INTRODUCTORY. 

the  spirit  and  law  of  the  Redeemer.  The  "  authority 5? 
which  the  Apostle  claims  as  existing,  and  to  be  exercised 
in  the  Church,  he  represents  (2  Cor.  x.  8.)  as  given 
"for  edification,  and  not  for  destruction."  Not  for  the 
purpose  of  creating  and  pampering  classes  of  "privileged 
orders/1  to  "  lord  it  over  God's  heritage  ;"  not  to  build 
up  a  system  of  polity,  which  may  minister  to  the  pride 
or  the  cupidity  of  an  ambitious  priesthood ;  not  to  form 
a  body,  under  the  title  of  clergy,  with  separate  interests 
from  the  laity  of  the  Church.  All  this  is  as  wicked  as 
it  is  unreasonable.  No  office,  no  power  is  appointed  by 
Jesus  Christ  in  his  Church,  but  that  which  is  necessary 
to  the  instruction,  the  purity,  and  the  happiness  of  the 
whole  body.  All  legitimate  government  here,  as  well  as 
elsewhere,  is  to  be  considered  as  a  means,  not  an  end; 
and  as  no  further  resting  on  divine  authority,  than  we 
can  say  in  support  of  all  its  claims  and  acts,  '-thus  saith 
the  Lord;"  than  it  is  adapted  to  build  up  the  great 
family  of  those  who  profess  the  true  religion,  in  know- 
ledge, peace  and  holiness  unto  salvation. 

The  summary  of  the  doctrine  of  Presbyterians,  then, 
concerning  ecclesiastical  power,  may  be  considered  as 
comprehended  in  the  following  propositions : 

1.  That  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ  is  the  only  King  and 
Head  of  the  Church,  the  Fountain  of  all  power;  and 
that  no  man  or  set  of  men,  have  any  right  to  consider 
themselves  as  holding  the  place  of  his  vicar,  or  repre- 
sentative. 

2.  That  the  Bible  contains  the  code  of  laws  which 
Christ  has  enacted,  and  given  for  the  government  of 
his  Church ;  and  that  it  is  the  only  infallible  rule  of 
faith  and  practice. 

3.  That  his  kingdom  is  not  of  this  world ;  and  of 
course,  that  the  Church  can  take  no  cognizance  of  any 


INTRODUCTORY.  27 

other  concerns  than  those  which  relate  to  the  spiritual 
interests  of  men. 

4.  That  the  power  of  Church  officers  is  not  original, 
or  inherent,  but  altogether  derived  and  ministerial. 
They  have  no  other  authority  than,  as  his  servants, 
and  in  his  name,  to  proclaim  the  truth  which  he  has 
declared,  and  to  urge  to  the  performance  of  those  duties 
which  he  has  commanded. 

5.  That  nothing  can  be  lawfully  required  of  any 
one  as  a  member  of  the  Church,  excepting  what  is  ex^ 
pressly  taught  in  Scripture ;  or,  by  good  and  necessary 
consequence  to  be  inferred  from  what  is  expressly 
taught  there. 

6.  That  the  Church  being  instituted  by  Christ  for 
the  chief  purpose  of  maintaing  in  their  purity  the 
doctrines  and  ordinances  of  Christ,  is  authorized  and 
bound  by  Him  to  refuse  admission  to  her  fellowship 
those  who  are  known  to  be  hostile  to  this  purpose,  and 
to  exclude  such  as  are  found  to  offend  against  this  pur- 
pose after  admission. 

7.  That  the  discipline  and  penalties  of  the  Church 
are  wholly  of  a  moral  kind,  consisting  of  admonition, 
entreaty,  warning,  suspension,  and  excommunication; 
and  that  exclusion  from  the  fellowship  of  the  body,  is 
the  highest  penalty  that  can  be  inflicted  on  any  delin- 
quent. # 

8.  That  the  apostolic  Church,  though  under  the 
bitterest  persecution,  was  instructed  by  the  inspired 
Apostles,  to  exercise  the  power  mentioned,  and  did 
actually  exercise  the  same  ;  and  is  to  be  considered  as 
therein  exemplifying  and  teaching  the  principles  which 
ought  to  regulate  the  Church  in  all  ages. 

9.  That  the  Church  can  exercise  no  authority  over 
any  others  than  her  own  members. 


28  INTRODUCTORY. 

10.  That  noiie  can  be  compelled  to  be  members,  or 
to  submit  to  her  authority  any  longer  than  they  choose 
to  do  so. 

11.  That  the  authority  of  the  Church*  cannot  be 
lawfully  exercised  for  any  other  purpose  than  to  promote 
the  purity,  order  and  edification  of  the  whole  body : 
and  that  of  course,  any  exertion  of  Church  power 
which  has  for  its  object  the  aggrandizement  of  eccle- 
siastics, at  the  expense  of  the  body  of  the  Church,  is 
an  unscriptural  abuse.     And, 

X 2.  Finally ;  that  all  civil  establishments  of  religion, 
in  any  form,  or  under  any  denomination,  are  wrong : 
contrary  to  the  spirit  of  Christianity  ;  injurious  to  the 
best  interests  of  the  Church ;  and  really  more  to  be 
deprecated  by  the  enlightened  friends  of  piety,  than 
the  most  sanguinary  persecution  that  can  be  inflicted 
by  the  arm  of  power. 

In  every  Church  completely  organized,  that  is,  fur- 
nished with  all  the  officers  which  Christ  has  instituted, 
and  which  are  necessary  for  carrying  into  full  effect  the 
laws  of  his  kingdom,  there  ought  to  be  three  classes  of 
officers,  viz :  at  least  one  Teaching  Elder \  Bishop,  or 
Pastor — a  bench  of  Ruling  Elders — and  Deacons. 
The  first  to  "minister  in  the  Word  and  Doctrine,"  and 
to  dispense  the  Sacraments'; — the  second  to  assist  in 
the  inspection  and  government  of  the  Church; — and 
the  third  to  "serve  tables;"  that  is,  to  take  care  of  the 
Church's  funds  destined  for  the  support  of  the  poor,  and 
sometimes  to  manage  whatever  relates  to  the  temporal 
support  of  the  gospel  and  its  ministers. 

The  following  Essay  wall  be  devoted  to  the  conside- 
ration of  the  second  class  of  these  officers,  namely, 
ruling  elders;  and  the  points  which  it  is  proposed 


INTRODUCTORY.  29 

more  particularly  to  discuss,  are  the  following : — The 
Church's  warrant  for  this  class  of  officers; — The 
nature,  design  and  duties  of  the  office  itself; — The 
qualifications  proper  for  those  who  bear  it; — The 
distinction  between  this  office,  and  that  of  deacons  ; 
by  whom  Ruling  Elders  ought  to  be  elected  ; — in 
what  manner  they  should  be  ordained; — The  prin- 
ciples which  ought  to  regulate  their  withdrawing  or 
being  deposed  from  office,  removing  from  one  Church 
to  another,  &c; — and,  finally,  the  advantages  at- 
tending this  form  of  government  in  the  Church. 

The  question,  whether  the  Church  has  any  warrant 
for  this  class  of  officers,  will  have  different  degrees  of 
importance  attached  to  it  by  different  persons.  Those 
who  believe  that  no  form  of  Church  government  what- 
ever can  justly  claim  to  be,  in  any  sense,  of  divine  right, 
will,  of  course,  consider  this  inquiry  as  of  small  moment. 
If  the  Church  be  at  perfect  liberty,  at  all  times,  to  adopt 
what  form  of  government  she  pleases,  and  to  modify, 
or  entirely  to  change  the  same  at  pleasure ;  then  no 
other  warrant  than  her  own  convenience  or  will,  ought 
to  be  required.  But  if  the  writer  of  the  following  pages 
be  correct  in  believing,  (hat  there  is  a  form  of  govern- 
ment for  the  family  of  God  laid  down  in  Scripture,  to 
which  it  is  the  duty  of  the  Church,  in  all  ages,  to  con- 
form ;  then  the  inquiry  which  it  is  the  purpose  of  several 
of  the  succeeding  chapters  to  pursue,  is  plainly  impor 
tant,  and  demands  our  serious  attention. 

It  is  believed,  then,  that  the  following  positions,  in 
reference  to  the  office  now  under  consideration  may  be 
firmly  maintained,  viz :  That  under  the  Old  Testament 
economy  in  general,  and  especially  in  the  Synagog  u 
service,  Elders  were  invariably  appointed  to  exercise 
authority  and  bear  rule  in  ecclesiastical  society; — Tha 

c  2 


30  INTRODUeTORT; 

similar  Elders,  after  the  model  of  the  Synagogue,  were 
appointed  in  the  primitive  Church,  under  the  direction 
of  inspired  Apostles  ; — That  we  find  in  the  writings  of 
some  of  the  early  Fathers,  evident  traces  of  the  same 
office  as  existing  in  their  times ; — That  the  Waldenses, 
and  other  pious  Witnesses  for  the  truth,  during  the  dark 
ages,  retained  this  class  of  officers  in  the  Church,  as  a 
divine  institution ; — That  the  Reformers,  with  very 
few  exceptions,  when  they  separated  from  the  corrup 
tions  of  Popery,  restored  this  office  to  the  Church ; — That 
a  number  of  distinguished  divines  and  Churches,  not 
otherwise  Presbyterian,  who  have  flourished  since  the 
Reformation,  have  remarkably  concurred  in  declaring 
for  the  same  office; — and,  finally,  that  Ruling  Elders, 
or  officers  of  a  similar  kind,  are  indispensably  necessaiy 
in  every  well  ordered  congregation.  Each  of  these 
topics  of  argument  is  entitled  to  separate  consideration 


CHAPTER  II. 

TESTIMONY  FROM  THE  ORDER  OF  THE  OLD  TES- 
TAMENT CHURCH. 

It  is  impossible  fully  to  understand  either  the  spirit 
the  facts,  or  the  nomenclature  of  the  New  Testament^ 
without  going  back  to  the  Old.  The  Christian  religion 
is  founded  upon  that  of  the  Jews ;  or  rather  is  the 
completion  of  it.  The  latter  was  the  infancy  and  adoles- 
cence of  that  body  of  which  the  former  is  the  manhood. 
And  it  is  remarkable,  .that  no  class  of  theologians  more 
strenuously  contend  for  the  connexion  between  the 
Jewish  and  Christian  economies,  and  the  impracticabi- 
lity of  taking  intelligent  views  of  the  one,  without  some 
previous  knowledge  of  the  other,  than  most  of  those  who 
deny  the  apostolic  origin  of  the  class  of  officers  now  under 
consideration.  With  all  such  persons,  then,  we  join  issue, 
And,  as  a  very  large  part  of  the  titles  and  functions  of 
ecclesiastical  officers,  were,  evidently,  transmitted  from 
the  ceremonial  to  the  spiritual  economy,  it  is  indis- 
pensably necessary,  in  order  fully  to  understand  their 
character,  to  go  back  to  their  source. 

The  term  Elder,  corresponding  with  fpf  in  Hebrew,, 
and  flrg6<r€ursgos,  in  Greek,  literally  signifies  an  aged 
person.  Among  the  Jews,  and  the  eastern  nations 
generally,  persons  advanced  in  life  were  commonly 
selected  to  fill  stations  of  dignity  and  authority,  because 


32  TESTIMONY  FROM  THE 

they  were  supposed  to  possess  most  wisdom,  gravity, 
prudence  and  experience.  From  this  circmstance,  the 
b  term  Elder,  became,  in  process  of  time,  and  by  a 
natural  association  of  ideas,  an  established  title  of  office.* 
Accordingly,  the  Jews  gave  this  title  to  most  of  their 
offices,  civil  as  well  as  ecclesiastical,  long  before  Syna- 
gogues were  established.  From  the  time  of  Moses. 
they  had  Elders  over  the  nation,  as  well  as  over  every 
city,  and  smaller  community.  These  are  repeatedly 
represented  as  inspectors,  and  rulers  of  the  people ;  as 
"  officers  set  over  them;"  and,  indeed,  throughout  their 
history,  there  is  every  reason  to  believe  that  the  body 
of  the  people  never,  themselves,  exercised  governmental 
acts ;  but  chose  their  Elders,  to  whom  all  the  details 
of  judicial  and  executive  authority,  under  their  divine 
Legislator  and  Sovereign,  were  constantly  committed. 

The  following  specimen  of  the  representation  given 
on  this  subject,  in  various  parts  of  the  Old  Testament. 
will  suffice,  at  once,  to  illustrate  and  establish  what  is 
here  advanced.  Even  while  the  children  of  Israel  were 
in  Egypt,  they  seem  to  have  had  Elders,  in  the  official 
sense  of  the  word ;  for  Jehovah,  in  sending  Moses  to 
deliver  them,  said,  Go,  and  gather  the  Elders  of  Israel 


*  It  has  been  often  remarked,  that  the  ancient  official  use  of 
this  word,  as  implying  wisdom  and  experience,  is  still  preserved 
in  many  modern  languages,  in  which  Seigneur, Signior,  Senator, 
and  other  similar  words,  are  used  to  express  both  dignity  and 
authority.  It  is  evident  that  all  these  words,  and  some  others 
which  mightbe  mentioned,  are  derivatives  from  the  Latin  word, 
Senior.  It  is  no  less  plain,  that  the  title  of  the  Magistrates  of 
Cities  and  Boroughs,  who  are  called  Aldermen  or  Eldermen,  is 
from  the  same  origin  with  our  modern  term  Elder.  Many  of 
the  titles  of  respect,  both  in  the  Eastern  and  Western  world, 
were  it  proper  to  take  time  for  the  purpose,  might  be  traced, 
beyond  all  doubt  to  a  similar  source. 


OLD  TESTAMENT  CHURCH.  33 

together,  and  say  unto  them,  The  Lord  hath  visited 
you,  and  hath  seen  what  is  done  to  you  in  Egypt. 
Exodus  iii.  16.  In  the  wilderness,  the  Elders  of  Israel 
are  spoken  of  as  called  together  by  Moses,  appealed  to 
by  Moses,  and  officially  acting-  under  that  divinely 
commissioned  leader,  on  occasions  almost  innumerable. 
These  Elders  appear  to  have  been  of  different  grades, 
and  endowed,  of  course,  with  different  powers;  Exod. 
xvii.  5.  xviii.  12.  xxiv.  1,  9.  Numbers  xi.  16.  Dent. 
xxv.  7 — 9.  xxix.  10.  xxxi.  9.  28.  From  these  and  other 
passages,  it  would  seem,  they  had  seventy  Elders  over 
the  nation;  and  besides  these,  Elders  over  thousands, 
over  hundreds,  over  fifties,  and  over  tens,  who  were  all 
charged  with  inspection  and  rule  in  their  respective 
spheres.  Again,  we  find  inspectors  and  rulers  of  the 
people,  under  the  name  of  Elders,  existing,  and  on  all 
public  occasions,  acting  in  their  official  character,  in  the 
time  of  Joshua;  during  the  period  of  the  judges;  under 
the  kings,  especially  during  the  most  favored  and 
happy  season  of  their  kingly  dominion ;  probably  during 
the  captivity  in  Babylon;  and,  beyond  all  doubt,  as 
soon  as  they  returned  from  captivit)^,  and  became  settled 
in  their  own  land;  until  the  Synagogue  system  was 
regularly  established  as  the  stated  means  of  popular 
instruction  and  worship. 

When  the  Synagogue  service  was  instituted,  is  a 
question  which  has  been  so  much  controverted,  and  is 
of  so  much  real  uncertainty  that  the  discussion  of  it  will 
not  be  attempted  in  this  place,  especially  as  it  is  a  question 
of  no  sort  of  importance  in  the  inquiry  now  before  us. 
All  that  it  is  necessary  for  us  to  assume,  is  that  it  existed, 
at  the  time  of  our  Lord's  advent,  and  for  a  considerable 
time  before;  and  that  the  Jews  had  been  long  accustomed 
to  its  order  and  worship;  which  no  one,  it  is  presumed. 


34  TESTIMONY   FROM   THE 

will  think  of  questioning.  Now,  whatever  might  have 
been  its  origin,  nothing  can  be  more  certain,  than  that, 
from  the  earliest  notices  we  have  of  the  institution,  and 
through  its  whole  history,  its  leading  officers  consisted 
of  a  bench  of  Elders,  who  were  appointed  to  bear  rule 
in  the  congregation ;  who  formed  a  kind  of  Consistory, 
or  ecclesiastical  judicatory; — to  receive  applicants  for 
admission  into  the  Church ;  to  watch  over  the  people, 
as  well  in  reference  to  their  morals,  as  their  obedience 
to  ceremonial  and  ecclesiastical  order;  to  administer 
discipline  when  necessary ;  and,  in  short,  as  the  repre- 
sentatives of  the  Church  or  congregation,  to  act  in  their 
name  and  behalf;  to  "bind"  and  "loose;"  and  to  see 
that  every  thing  was  "done  decently  and  in  order." 

It  is  not  forgotten  that  a  few  eminent  writers,  following 
the  celebrated  German  errorist,  .Eras  to,  have  contended 
that  there  was  no  ecclesiastical  government  among  the 
Jews  distinct  from  the  civil;  and  that,  of  course,  there 
were  no  rulers  of  the  Synagogue,  separate  from  the  civil 
judges.  Those  who  wish  to  see  this  error  satisfactorily 
refuted,  and  the  existence  of  a  distinct  ecclesiastical 
government  among  that  people  clearly  established,  may 
consult  what  has  been  written  on  the  subject,  by  the 
learned  Gillespie*  by  professor  Rutherford^  by  Bishop 
StilHngfieet:%  and  others ;  from  whose  writings  they 
will  be  convinced,  beyond  all  reasonable  doubt,  that  the 
civil  and  ecclesiastical  judicatories  were  really  distinct; 
that  the  persons  composing  each,  as  well  as  their 
respective  spheres  of  judgment  were  peculiar;  and  that 
the  latter  existed  long  after  the  civil  sovereignty  of  the 

Jewish  people  was  taken  away. 

■     —  i 

*  Aaron's  Rod,  #c.  Lond.  4to.  1646. 

f  Divine  Right  of  Church  Government,  &c.  Lond.  4to.  1645. 

|  Jrenicum.  Part  %>  Chapter  6. 


OLD  TESTAMENT  CHURCH.  35 

There  has  been,  indeed,  much  diversity  of  opinion 
among  learned  men,  concerning  a  variety  of  questions 
which  arise  in  reference  to  these  Elders  of  the  Syna- 
gogue. As,  for  example,  whether  there  was  a  difference 
oirunk  among  them  ?  Whether  some  were  teachers  as 
well  as  rulers,  .and  others  rulers  only  ?  Whether  there 
was  any  diversity  in  their  ordination,  &c,  &c?  But 
while  eminent  writers  on  Jewish  antiquities  have  differ- 
ed, and  continue  to  differ,  in  relation  to  these  points,  they 
are  all  perfectly  agreed  in  one  point,  namely,  that  in 
every  Synagogue  there  was  a  bench  of  Elders,  consist- 
ing of  at  least  three  persons,  who  were  charged  with  the 
whole  inspection,  government,  and  discipline  of  the 
Synagogue ;  who,  as  a  court  or  bench  of  rulers,  received, 
judged,  censured,  excluded,  and,  in  a*  word,  performed 
every  judicial  act,  necessary  to  the  regularity  and  welfare 
of  the  congregation.  In  this  general  fact,  Vitringa,  Sel- 
den,  Voetins,  March,  Grotius,  Lightfoot,  Blondel, 
Salmasius,  and,  indeed,  so  far  as  I  can  now  recollect,  all 
the  writers  on  this  subject,  who  deserve  to  be  represented 
as  high  authorities,  substantially  agree.  And  in  support 
of  this  fact,  they  quote  Philo,  Josephus,  Maimonides, 
Benjamin  of  Tudela,  and  the  great  mass  of  other 
Jewish  witnesses,  who  are  considered  as  holding  the 
iirst  rank  among  Rabbinical  authorities.  Indeed,  they 
speak  of  the  fact  as  too  unquestionable  to  demand  any 
formal  array  of  testimony  for  its  confirmation.*' 

Accordingly,  we  find  various  passages  in  the  New 

*  When  the  unanimous  agreement  of  these  learned  writers  is 
asserted,  it  is  not  meant  to  be  alleged  that  they  all  entertain  the 
same  views  of  the  Elders  of  the  Synagogue,  as  to  all  particu- 
lars; but  simply  that  they  all  unite  in  maintaining  that  there 
was,  in  every  Synagogue,  such  a  bench  of  Elders,  who  con- 
ducted its  discipline,  and  managed  its  affairs. 


36  TESTIMONY  FROM  THE 

Testament  history,  which  refer  to  these  Ruling  Elders, 
as  belonging  to  the  old  economy,  then  drawing  to  a 
close,  and  which  admit,  it  would  appear,  of  no  other 
interpretation  than  that  which  supposes  their  existence. 
The  following  specimen  will  suffice;  Mark,  v.  22. 
And,  behold,  there  cometh  one  of  the  rulers  of  the 
Synagogue,  Jairus  by  name;  and  when  he  savj  him. 
he  fell  at  his  feet;  Acts  xiii.  15.  And  after  the  reading 
of  the  law  and  the  prophets,  the  riders  of  the 
Synagogue  sent  unto  them,  saying,  ye  men  and 
brethren,  if  ye  have  any  word  of  exhortation  for  the 
people,  say  on.  On  this  latter  passage,  Dr.  Gill,  an 
eminent  master  of  oriental,  and  especially  of  rabbinical 
learning,  in  his  Commentary,  writes  thus: — u  The  rulers 
of  the  Synagogue  sent  unto  them :  that  is,  those  who 
were  the  principal  men  in  the  Synagogue;  the  Ruler  of 
it,  together  with  the  Elders;  for  there  was  but  one 
Ruler  in  a  Synagogue,  though  there  were  more  Elders  ; 
and  so  the  Syriac  version  here  renders  it,  the  Elders  of 
the  Synagogue?  By  this  language,  as  I  understand 
the  Doctor,  he  does  not  mean  to  intimate  that,  the  other 
Elders  of  whom  he  here  speaks,  did  not  bear  rule  in 
the  Synagogue;  but  that  there  was  only  one,  who,  by 
way  of  eminence,  was  called,  "  the  Ruler  of  the 
Synagogue ;"  that  is,  who  presided  at  their  meetings 
for  official  business.  It  is  plain,  however,  that,  even  in 
this  assertion,  he  is  in  some  degree  in  error ;  for  more 
than  once  we  find  a  plurality  of  persons  in  single 
Synagogues  spoken  of  as  u  Rulers." 

The  learned  Vitringa,  who,  undoubtedly,  is  entitled 
to  a  very  high  place  in  the  list  of  authorities  on  this 
subject,  is  of  the  opinion,  that  all  who  occupied  a  place 
with  the  bench  of  Elders  in  the  Synagogue,  were  of  one 
and  the  same  rank  or  order ;  that  they  all  received  one 


• 


OLD   TESTAMENT    CHURCH.  37 

"and  the  same  ordination ;  and  were,  of  course,  equally 
authorised  to  preach,  when  duty  or  inclination  called 
them  to  this  part  of  the  public  service,  as  well  as  to  rule. 
And  in  this  opinion  he  is  joined  by  some  others,  whose 
judgment  is  worthy  of  the  highest  respect.    But,  at  the 
same  time,  this   eminent  man  freely  grants,  that  a 
majority  of  the  Elders  of  the  Synagogue  were  not,  in 
fact,  ordinarily  employed  in   teaching  or  preaching; 
that  this  part  of  the  public  service  was  principally  under 
the  direction  of  the  Chief  Ruler,  or   Head  of  each 
Synagogue,  who  attended  to  it  himself,  or  called  on  one 
of  the  other  Elders,  or  even  any  other  learned  Doctor 
who  might  be  present,  and  who  was  deemed  capable 
of  addressing  the  people  in  an  instructive  and  acceptable 
manner;  and  that  the  chief  business  of  the  mass  of  the 
Elders  was  to  rule.*    The  correctness  of  this  opinion 
has  been  questioned.    A  number  of  other  writers,  quite 
his  equals,  both  in  talents  and  learning,  and  especially 
quite  as  conversant  with  Jewish  authorities,  have  main- 
tained, that  a  majority  of  the  Elders  in  the  Synagogue, 
were  neither  chosen   nor  set  apart  to  the  function  of 
teaching,  but  to  that  of  ruling  only.   But,  in  the  want 
of  absolute  certainty  which  exists  on  this  subject,  and 
for  the  sake  of  argument,  I  am  willing  to  acquiesce  in 
Vitringds  opinion.     Suppose  it  to  have  been  as  he 
alleges  : — This  is  quite  sufficient  for  our  purpose.    If  it 
be  conceded,  that  there  was,  in  every  Synagogue,  a 
bench  of  Elders,  who,  as  a  judicial  body,  were  entrusted 
with  the  whole  government  and  discipline  of  the  con- 
gregation : — that  a  majority  of  these  Elders  seldom  or 
never  preached,  but  were,  in  fact  (whatever  right  they 
might  have  had)  chiefly  occupied  as  ecclesiastical  rulers; 

*  De  Synagoga  Vetere.    Lib.  iii.  Par.  i.  Cap.  7. 


38  TESTIMONY    FROM    THE 

and  that  all  ecclesiastical  matters,  instead  of  being  dis- 
cussed and  decided  by  the  congregation  at  large,  were 
constantly  committed  to  the  judicial  deliberation  and 
decision  of  this  Eldership;  if  these  things  be  granted- 
and  they  are  granted,  in  substance,  by  every  writer. 
entitled  to  be  referred  to  as  an  authority,  with  whom  I 
am  acquainted; — it  is  all  that  can  be  considered  as 
material  to  the  purpose  of  our  argument.  This  will 
appear  more  fully  in  the  sequel. 

These  officers  of  the  Synagogue  were  called  by 
different  names,  as  we  learn  from  the  New  Testament, 
and  from  the  most  respectable  Jewish  authorities.  The 
most  common  and  familiar  name,  perhaps,  was  that  of 
Elders,  as  before  stated  at  large.  They  were  also 
called  Rulers  of  the  Synagogue ;  a  title  of  frequent 
occurrence  in  the  New  Testament,  as  applied  to  the 
whole  bench  of  the  Elders  in  question ;  but  which  would 
seem,  from  some  passages,  to  have  been,  at  least,  some- 
times applied,  by  way  of  eminence,  to  the  principal 
ruler  in  each  Synagogue,  which  principal  ruler  appears, 
however,  to  have  been  of  the  same  general  rank,  or 
order,  with  the  rest,  and  to  have  had  no  other  precedence 
than  that  which  consisted  in  presiding  and  taking 
the  lead  in  the  public  service.  These  officers  were, 
further  called  Heads  of  the  Synagogue ; — Overseers, 
or  Bishops; — Presidents ; — Orderers,or  Regidators 
of  the  affairs  of  the  Synagogue; — Guides,  &c.  &c. 
These  titles  are  given  at  length  by  Vitringa*  SeldenJ 
and  others,  with  the  original  vouchers  and  exemplifica- 
tions of  each ;  showing  that  they  all  imply  hearing  rule, 
as  well  as  the  enjoyment  of  pre-eminence  and  dignity. 


De  Synagoga  Vetere,  Lib.  iii.  Par.  i.  Cap.  1,  2,  3. 
f  De  Synedriis — passim. 


OLD    TESTAMENT    CHURCH.  39 

And,  as  these  Elders  were  distinguished  from  the 
common  members  of  the  Synagogue  by  appropriate 
titles,  indicating  official  honor  and  power;  so  they  had 
also  distinct  and  honorable  scats  assigned  them,  when 
the  congregation  over  which  they  ruled  was  convened. 
The  place  of  sitting  usually  appropriated  to  them,  was 
a  semi-circular  bench,  in  the  middle  of  which  the  chief 
ruler  was  placed,  and  his  colleagues  on  each  side  of 
him,  with  their  faces  toward  the  assembly,  and  in  a 
certain  position  with  respect  to  the  Ark,  the  principal 
Door,  and  the  cardinal  points  of  the  compass.  This 
statement  is  confirmed  by  the  learned  Thomdike,  a 
distinguished  Episcopal  divine,  of  the  17th  century. 
In  speaking  of  the  Consistory,  or  bench  of  Elders,  in 
the  Synagogue,  and  describing  their  manner  of  sitting 
in  public  worship,  he  makes  the  following  statement,  in 
the  form  of  a  quotation  from  Maimonides,wai\  confirms 
it  abundantly  from  other  sources.  "How  sit  the  people 
in  the  Synagogue  ?  The  Elders  sit  with  their  faces 
towards  the  people,  and  their  backs  towards  the  Hecall 
(the  place  where  they  lay  the  copy  of  the  law;)  and  all 
■the  people  sit  rank  before  rank,  the  face  of  every  rank 
towards  the  back  of  the  rank  before  it;  so  the  faces  of 
all  the  people  are  towards  the  Sanctuary,  and  towards  the 
Elders,  and  towards  the  Ark:  and  when  the  Minister 
of  the  Synagogue  standeth  up  to  prayer,  he  standeth 
on  the  ground  before  the  Ark,  with  his  face  toward  the 
sanctuary,  as  the  rest  of  the  people."* 

The  number  of  the  Elders  in  each  Synagogue  was 
not  governed  by  any  absolute  rule.  In  large  cities, 
according  to  certain  Jewish  authorities  quoted  by  Yit- 

*  Discourse  of  the  Service  of  God  in  Religious  Assemblies. 
Chap.  3.  p.  56. 


40  TESTIMONY  FROM  THE 

ring  a  the  number  was  frequently  very  large.  But  even 
in  the  smallest  Synagogues,  we  are  assured,  as  mention- 
ed in  a  former  page,  that  there  were  never  less  than 
three,  that  the  judicatory  might  never  be  equally  divided. 

Such  were  the  arrangements  for  maintaining  purity 
and  order  in  the  Synagogues,  or  parish  churches  of  the 
old  economy,  anterior  to  the  advent  of  the  Messiah. 
It  would  seem  to  be  impossible  for  any  one  to  contem- 
plate this  statement,  so  amply  supported  by  all  sound 
authority,  without  recognising  a  striking  likeness  to  the 
arrangements  afterwards  adopted  in  the  New  Testament 
Church.  That  this  likeness  is  real,  and  has  been 
maintained  by  some  of  the  ablest  writers  on  the  subject; 
the  following  short  extracts  will  sufficiently  establish. 

The  first  quotation  shall  be  taken  from  Bishop 
Burnet.  u  Among  the  Jews,"  says  he,  "  be  who  was 
the  chief  of  the  Synagogue  was  called  Chazan  Hake- 
veseth,  that  is,  the  Bishop  of  the  Congregation^  and 
Sheliach  Tsibbor,  the  Angel  of  the  Church.  And 
the  Christian  Church  being  modelled  as  near  the  form 
of  the  Synagogue  as  could  be,  as  they  retained  many  of 
the  rites,  so  the  form  of  their  government  was  continued,, 
and  the  names  remained  the  same,"  And  again  ;  "  In 
the  Synagogues  there  was,  first,  one  that  was  called  the 
Bishop  of  the  Congregation.  Next  the  three  Orderers, 
and  Judges  of  every  thing  about  the  Synagogue,  who 
were  called  Tsekenimy  and  by  the  Greeks,  *gs<j£v<rsgoL 
or  ysgwrss.  These  ordered  and  determined  every  thing 
that  concerned  the  Synagogue,  or  the  persons  in  it. 
Next  to  them,  were  the  three  ParnassinrOY  Deacons^ 
whose  charge  was  to  gather  the  collections  of  the  rich, 
and  to  disuibute  them  to  the  poor.  The  term  Elder, 
was  generally  given  to  all  their  Judges :  but  chiefly  to 
those  of  the  great  Sanhedrim,     So  we  have  it  MatU 


OLD  TESTAMENT  CHURCH. 


41 


16.  21.  MarkS.  31.  14.  43.  &  15.  1,  and  Acts  23. 
14."  "A  great  deal  might  be  said  to  prove  that  the 
Apostles,  in  their  first  constitutions,  took  things  as  they 
had  been  modelled  to  their  hand  in  the  Synagogue, 
And  this  they  did,  both  because  it  was  not  their  design 
to  innovate,  except  where  the  nature  of  the  Gospel 
dispensation  obliged  them  to  do  it: — As  also,  because, 
they  took  all  means  possible  to  gain  the  Jews,  who  we 
find  were  zealous  adherers  to  the  traditions  of  their 
fathers,  and  not  easily  weaned  from  those  precepts  of 
Moses )  which  by  Christ's  death  were  evacuated.  And 
if  the  Apostles  went  so  great  a  length  in  complying  with 
them  in  greater  matters, as  circumcision  and  other  legal 
observances,  (which  appears  from  the  Acts  and  Ejns- 
ties,)  we  have  good  grounds  to  suppose  that  they  would 
have  yielded  to  them  in  what  was  more  innocent  and 
less  important.  Besides,  there  appears,  both  in  our  Lord 
himself,  and  in  his  Apostles,  a  great  inclination  to 
symbolize  with  them  as  far  as  was  possible.  Now  the 
nature  of  the  Christian  worship  shows  evidently,  that  it 
came  in  the  room  of  the  Synagogue,  which  was  moral, 
and  not  of  the  temple  worship,  which  was  typical  and 
ceremonial.  Likewise  this  parity  of  customs  betwixt  the 
Jews  and  Christians,  was  such  that  it  made  them  taken 
by  the  Romans,  and  other  more  overly  observers,  for  one 
sect  of  religion.  And,  finally,  any  that  will  impartially 
read  the  New  testament,  will  find  that  when  the  forms 
of  government  or  worship  are  treated  of,  it  is  not  done 
with  such  architectonal  exactness,  as  wTas  necessary,  if 
a  new  thing  had  been  instituted,  which  we  find  practised 
by  Moses.  But  the  Apostles  rather  speak  as  those  who 
give  rules  for  the  ordering  and  directing  of  what  was 
already  in  being.  From  all  which  it  seems  well  grounded 
and  rational  to  assume,  that  the  first  constitution  of  the 

d  2 


42 


TESTIMONY  FROM  THE" 


Christian  Churches  was  taken  from  the  model  of  the 
Synagogue,  in  which  these  Elders  were  separated,  for 
the  discharge  of  their  employments,,  by  an  imposition 
of  hands,  as  all  Jewish  writers  do  clearly  witness."* 

The  second  testimony  shall  be  that  of  the  Rev  Dr. 
Thomas  Godwin,  an  English  divine  of  great  erudition, 
especially  in  oriental  learning.  In  his  well  known  work, 
entitled  '-'Moses  and  Aaron,"  we  find  the  following 
passage: — "  There  were  in  Israel  distinct  Courts,  con- 
sisting of  distinct  persons;  the  one  principally  for  Church 
business;  the  other  for  affairs  in  the  commonwealth: — 
the  one  an  ecclesiastical  Consistory  ;  the  other  a 
ewU  Judicatory. — The  seetdar  Consistory  was  named 
a  Sanhedrim,  or  Council ;  the  spiritual,  a  Syna- 
gogue.  The  office  of  the  ecclesiastical  court  was  to 
put  a  difference  between  things  holy  and  unholy,  and 
to  determine  appeals  in  controversies  of  difficulty.  It 
was  a  representative  Church.  Hence  is  that,  Die 
Ecclesice;  Matt.  18,  16.t 

The  next  question  shall  be  taken  from  Dr.  Light- 
foot,  another  Episcopal  divine,  still  more  distinguished 
for  his  oriental  and  rabbinical  learning.  u  The  Apostle," 
says  he.  "calleth  the  minister  Episcopus,  or  (Bishop,) 
from  the  common  and  known  title  of  the  Chazan  or 
Overseer  in  the  Synagogue."  And  again  ; — "  Besides 
these,  there  was  the  public  minister  of  the  Synagogue, 
who  prayed  publicly,  and  took  care  about  reading  the 
law,  and  sometimes  preached,  if  there  were  not  some 
other  to  discharge  this  office.    This  person  was  called, 

TDV^  fV^^  lne  an§el  °f tne  Church,  and  JlQj^n 
j ?n  the  Chazan,  or  Bishop  of  the  congregation.    The 

*  Observations  on  the  First  and  Second  Canons,  #c.  p.  2,  83;. 
34,  85,     Glasgow.  12mo.  1673. 
t  Moses  and  Aaron,  Book  5,  chapter  i. 


OLD  TESTAMENT  CHURCH.  43 

Aruch  gives  the  reason  of  the  name.     The  Chazan 
says  he,  is  ^yy  ft^&  the  angel  of  the  Church,  (or 
the  public  minister,)  and  the  Tar  gum  renders  the  word 
HN11  by  the  word  j-tttDj  one  that  oversees.     For  it 
is  incumbent  on  him  to  oversee  how  the  reader  reads 
and  whom  he  may  call  out  to  read  in  the  law.     The 
public  Minister  of  the  Synagogue  himself  read  not  the 
law  publicly;  but  every# Sabbath  he  called  out  seven 
of  the  Synagogue  (on  other  days  fewer)  who  he  judged 
fit  to  read.    He  stood  by  him  that  read,  with  great  care, 
observing  that  he  read  nothing  either  falsely  or  impro- 
perly, and  called  him  back,  and  correcting  him,  if  he 
had  failed  in  any  thing.     And  hence  he  was  called 
Chazan,  that  is,  Etfitfxoffog,  Bishop ,  or  Overseer.    Cer- 
tainly the  signification  of  the  words  Bishop  and  Angel 
of  the  Church,  had  been  determined  with  less  noise, 
if  recourse  had  been  had  to  the  proper  fountains,  and 
men  had  not  vainly  disputed  about  the  signification  of 
words  taken  I  know  not  whence.     The  service  and 
worship  of  the  temple  being  abolished,  as  being  cere- 
monial,  God    transplanted   the  worship   and    public 
adoration  of  God  used  in  the  Synagogues,  which  was 
moral,   into  the  Christian  Church ;  viz  r  the  public 
ministry,   public  prayers,  reading  God's  Word,  and 
preaching,  &c.     Hence  the  names  of  the  ministers  of 
the  gospel  were  the  very  same,  the  Angel  of  the  Churchy 
and  the  Bishop,  which  belonged  to  the  Ministers  in 
the  Synagogues.    "  There  was  in  every  Synagogue,  a 
bench  of  three.     This  bench  consisted  of  three  Elders, 
rightly  and  by  imposition  of  hands  preferred  to  the 
Eldership.*'     "There  were  also  three  Deacons,  or 
Almoners,  on  which  was  the  care  of  the  poor.1 


3J* 


*  LightfooVs  Works,  Vol.  1.  p.  303.  Vol.  ii.  p.  133,  755. 


44  TESTIMONY  FROM  TtiET 

In  another  place,  the  same  learned  orientalist,  says- 
describing  the  worship  in  the  Jewish  Synagogue: — "  In 
the  body  of  the  Church  the  congregation  met,  and 
prayed  and  heard  the  law,  and  the  manner  of  theiv 
sitting  was  this — The  Elders  sat  near  the  Chancel, 
with  their  faces  down  the  Church :  and  the  people  sat 
one  form  behind  another,  with  their  faces  up  the 
Church,  toward  the  Chancel  and  the  Elders. — -Of  these 
Elders  there  were  some  that  had  rule  and  office  in  the 
Synagogue,  and  some  that  had  not.  And  this  distinc- 
tion the  Apostle  seemeth  to  allude  unto,  in  that  much 
disputed  text,  1  Tim.  v.  18.  The  Elders  that  rule 
well,  &c;  where  'the  Elders  that  ruled  well'  are  set 
not  only  in  opposition  to  those  that  ruled  ill,  but  to 
those  that  ruled  not  at  all. — We  may  see,  then,  whence 
these  titles  and  epithets  in  the  New  Testament  are 
taken,  namely,  from  the  common  platform  and  consti- 
tution of  the  Synagogues,  where  Angelus  Ecclesice, 
and  Episcopus  were  terms  of  so  ordinary  use  and 
knowledge.  And  we  may  observe  from  whence  the 
Apostle  taketh  his  expressions,  when  he  speaketh  of 
some  Elders  ruling,  and  laboring  in  word  and  doctrine, 
and  some  not ;  namely,  from  the  same  platform  and 
constitution  of  the  Synagogue,  where  '  the  Ruler  of  the 
Synagogue'  was  more  singularly  for  ruling  the  affairs 
of  the  Synagogue,  and  '  the  minister  of  the  Congrega- 
tion,' laboring  in  the  word,  and  reading  the  law,  and 
in  doctrine  about  the  preaching  of  it.  Both  these 
together  are  sometimes  called  jointly,  'the  Rulers  of 
the  Synagogue;'  Acts  xiii,  15.;  Mark  v.  22.;  being 
both  Elders  that  ruled;  but  the  title  is  more  singularly 
given  to  the  first  of  them."* 

*  Ibid,  i.  611,612.. 


OLD  TESTAMENT  CHURCH-  45 

Again,  he  says: — "In  all  the  Jew:s  Synagogues  there 
were  Parnasin,  Deacons,  or  such  as  bach  care  of  the 
poor,  whose  work  it  was  to  gather  alms  for  them  from 
the  congregation,  and  to  distribute  it  to  them.  That 
needful  office  is  here  (Acts  vi.)  translated  into  the 
Christian  Church.* 

The  fourth  quotation  shall  be  taken  from  Dr.  (after- 
wards Bishop)  Stilling  fleet,  who,  in  his  Irenicum> 
maintains  a  similar  position  with  confidence  and  zeal, 
the  following  is  a  specimen  of  his  language: — "That 
which  we  lay,  then,  as  a  foundation,  whereby  to  clear 
what  apostolical  practice  was,  is  that  the  Apostles,  in 
forming  Churches,  did  observe  the  customs  of  the  Jewish 
Synagogue."t  And  in  support  of  this  position,  particu- 
larly in  reference  to  the  Eldership  of  the  Synagogue, 
he  quotes  a  large  number  of  the  most  distinguished 
writers,  both  Jewish  and  Christian.  It  is  due  to  candor, 
indeed,  to  state,  that  Stilling  fleet  does  not  admit  that 
any  of  the  Elders,  either  of  the  Synagogue,  or  of  the 
primitive  Church,  were  lay-Elders,  but  thinks  they 
were  all  invested  with  some  kind  of  clerical  character. 
This,  however,  as  before  remarked,  does  not  at  all  affect 
the  value  of  his  testimony  to  the  general  facty  that,  in 
every  Synagogue  there  was  a  Consistory,  or  Judica- 
tory, of  Elders — and  that  the  same  class  of  officers 
was  adopted,  both  name  and  thing,  in  the  apostolic 
Church,  which  he  unequivocally  asserts  and  proves. 

In  the  same  general  doctrine,  Gr otitis  and  Salma- 
sius  of  Holland,  decisively  concur.  By  Grotius,  the 
following  strong  and  unqualified  language  is  used  : — 
"  The  whole  polity,  or  order  {regimen)  of  the  Churches 

*  Ibid.  i.  279. 

|  Irenicum.  Part  2.  Chapter  6. 


46  TESTIMONY  FROM  THE 

of  Christ,  was  conformed  to  the  model  of  the  Jewish 
Synagogue!"  And  again  ;  speaking  of  ordination  by 
the  imposition  of  hands,  he  says : — This  method  was 
observed  in  setting  apart  the  Rulers  and  Elders  of  the 
Synagogue ;  and  thence  the  custom  passed  into  the 
Christian  Church."  Salmasius  also,  and  other  wri- 
ters, of  equally  profound  learning,  might  be  quoted  as 
unequivocally  deciding,  that  the  Synagogue  had  a 
bench  of  Ruling  Eiders,  and  that  a  similar  bench,  after 
that  model,  was  constituted  in  the  Christian  Church. 
Especially,  he  contends  that  the  Elders  of  the  Church 
were,  beyond  all  doubt,  taken  from  the  Eldership  in 
the  Synagogue. f 

The  learned  Spencer,  a  divine  of  the  Church  of 
England,  in  the  seventeenth  century,  teaches  the 
same  general  doctine,  when  he  says : — "  The  Apostles, 
also,  that  this  reformation  (the  change  from  the  Old  to 
the  New  Testament  dispensation)  might  proceed  gently, 
and  without  noise,  received  into  the  Christian  Church 
many  of  those  institutions  which  had  been  long  in  use 
among  the  Jews.  Among  the  number  of  these  may  be 
reckoned,  the  imposition  of  hands;  bishops,  elders, 
and  deacons;  excommunication,  ordination,  and 
other  things  familiar  to  learned  men."+ 

The  Rev.  Dr.  Adam  Clarke,  whose  eminent  learn- 
ing no  competent  judge  will  question,  also  bears  tes- 
timony that  in  every  Jewish  Synagogue,  at  the  time 
of  the  coming  of  Christ,  and  before,  there  was  an 
ecclesiastical  judicatory,  or  little  Court,  whose  duty  it 
was  to  conduct  the  spiritual  government  of  each  con- 


*  Grctii  Annotaiiones  in  Act.  Aposl.  vi.  xi. 

f  De  Primatu  Papce.  cap.  i. 

\  De  Legibus  Hebrceorum,  Lib.  iii.  Dissert. I.  Cap.  2.  sect. 4.. 


OLD  TESTAMENT  CHUftCH.  47 

gregation.  Among  several  places  in  which  he  make* 
this  statement,  the  following  is  decisive: — In  his  Com- 
mentary on  James  ii.  2,  he  says: — "In  ancient  times 
petty  courts  of  judicature  were  held  in  the  Synagogues, 
as  Vitringa  has  sufficiently  proved,  De  Vet.  Syn.  1. 
3. ;  and  it  is  prohahle  that  the  case  here  adduced  was 
one  of  a  judicial  kind ;  where  of  the  two  parties,  one 
was  rich,  and  the  other  poor;  and  the  master  or  ruler 
of  the  Synagogue,  or  he  who  presided  in  this  court, 
paid  particular  deference  to  the  rich  man,  and  neglected 
the  poor  person;  though. as  plaintiff  and  defendant, 
they  were  equal  in  the  eye  of  justice." 

I  shall  cite  on  this  subject  only  one  more  authority; 
that  of  the  celebrated  Augustus  Neander,  Professor  in 
the  University  of  Berlin,  and  generally  considered  as, 
perhaps,  more  profoundly  skilled  in  Christian  antiqui- 
ties, than  any  other  man  now  living.     He  is,  moreover, 
a  Minister  of  the  Lutheran  Church,  and,  of  course,  has 
no  sectarian  spirit  to  gratify  in  vindicating  Fresbyteri- 
anism.     And,  what  is  not  unworthy  of  notice,  being 
himself  of  Jewish  extraction,  he  has  enjoyed  the  highest 
advantages  for  exploring  the  peculiar  polity  of  that 
people.     After  showing  at  some  length,  that  the  govern- 
ment of  the  primitive  Church  was  not  monarchical  or 
prelatical,  but  dictated  throughout  by  a  spirit  of  mutual 
love,  counsel,  and  prayer,  he  goes  on  to  express  himself 
thus:    "We  may  suppose  that  where  any  thing  could 
be  found  in  the  wray  of  Church  forms,  which  was 
consistent  with  this  spirit,  it  would  be  willingly  appro- 
priated  by  the   Christian   community.      Now   there 
happened  to  be  in  the  Jewish  Synagogue,  a  system 
of  government  of  this  nature ;  not  monarchical,  but 
rather  aristocratical  (or  a  government  of  the  most 
venerable  and  excellent.)  A  council  of  Elders,  O'ipt 


48  TESTIMONY  FROM  THE 

T£c<j§utc£g»,  conducted  all  the  affairs  of  that  body,     ll 
seemed  most  natural  that  Christianity)  developing  itself 
from  the  Jewish  religion,  should  take  thi3  form  of 
government.     This  form  must  also  have  appeared 
natural  and  appropriate  to  the  Roman  citizens,  since 
their  nation  had,  from  the  earliest  times,  been,  to  some 
extent,  under  the  control  of  a  Senate,  composed  of 
Senators,  or  Elders.    When  the  Church  was  placed 
under  a  council  of  Elders,  they  did  not  always  happen 
to  be  the  oldest  in  reference  to  years ;  but  the  term 
expressive  of  age  here,  was,  as  in  the  Latin  Senatus, 
and  in  the  Greek  ys|outf«,  expressive  of  worth  or  merit. 
Besides  the  common  name  of  these  overseers  of  the 
Church,   to   wit,   tp^jtcpoj,   there   were  many  other 
names  given,  according  to  the  peculiar  situation  occupied 
by  the  individual,  or  rqjher  his  peculiar  field  of  labor; 
as  cojfjisvss,   shepherds;  ^ovjasvoi  leaders;  <7r|osCTWTSs  <ruv 
acSsXpwv,  rulers  of  the  brethren ;  and  Sflntfxwroij  overseers."* 
Now,   if,   in  the  ancient  Jewish  Synagogue,  the 
government  of  the  congregation  was  not  vested,  either 
in  the  people  at  large,  or  in  any  single  individual, 
but  in  a  bench  of  Elders ;  if  this  is  acknowledged  on 
all  hands,  as  one  of  the  clearest  and  most  indubitable 
facts  in  Jewish  antiquity  ; — and  if,  in  the  judgment  of 
the  most  learned  and  pious  divines  that  ever  lived, 
both  episcopal  and  non-episcopal,  the  New  Testament 
Church  was  formed  after  the  model  of  the  Jewish 
Synagogue,  and  not  after  the  pattern  of  the  Temple 
service ; — we  may,  of  course,  expect  to  find  some  evi- 
dence of  this  in  the  history  of  the  apostolic  Churches. 
How  far  this  expectation  is  realized,  will  be  seen  in  the 
next  chapter. 

*  Kirchengeschichte,  Vol.  i.  p.  283,  235. 


X 


CHAPTER  III. 

EVIDENCE   IN  FAVOR  OP  THE   OFFICE  FROM  THE 
NEW  TESTAMENT   SCRIPTURES. 

In  this  chapter  it  is  proposed  to  show,  that  the  office 
in  question  is  mentioned  in  the  New  Testament,  as 
existing  in  the  apostolic  Church ;  that  it  was  adopted 
from  the  Synagogue;  and  that  it  occupied,  in  substance, 
the  same  place  in  the  days  of  the  Apostles,  that  it  now 
occupies  in  our  truly  primitive  and  scriptural  Church, 

The  first  assertion  is,  that  this  class  of  officers  was 
adopted  in  the  Church  of  Christ,  under  its  New  Testa- 
ment form,  after  the  model  of  the  Synagogue.   Some 
have  said,  indeed,  that  the  Apostles  adopted  the  model 
of  the  Temple,  and  not  of  the  Synagogue  service,  in 
the  organization  of  the  Church.     But  the  slightest  im- 
partial attention  to  facts,  will  be  sufficient,  it  is  believed, 
to  disprove  this  assertion.  -If  we  compare  the  titles,  the 
powers,  the  duties,  and  the  ordination  of  the  officers  of 
the  Christian  Church,  as  well  as  the  nature  and  order 
of  its  public  service,  as  established  by  the  Apostles,  with 
the  Temple  and  the  Synagogue  systems  respectively, 
we  shall  find  the  organization  and  service  of  the  Church 
to  resemble  the  Temple  in  scarcely  any  tiling;  while 
they  resemble  the  Synagogue  in  almost  every  thing. 
There  were  Bishops,  Elders,  and  Deacons  in  the 
Synagogue;   but  no   officers  bearing  these  titles,  or 
performing  similar  functions  in  the  Temple.     There 
was  ordination  by  the  imposition  of  hands  in  the 

E 


50  TESTIMONY   FROM  THE 

Synagogue ;  but  no  such  ordination  in  the  Temple, 
There  were  reading  the  Scriptures,  expounding  them, 
and  public  prayers,  every  Sabbath  day  in  the  Syna- 
gogue; while  the  body  of  the  people  went  up  to  the 
Temple  only  three  times  a  year,  and  even  then  to 
attend  on  a  very  different  service.  In  the  Synagogue, 
there  was  a  system  established,  which  included  a 
weekly  provision,  not  only  for  the  instruction  and 
devotions  of  the  people,  but  also  for  the  maintenance  of 
discipline,  and  the  care  of  the  poor;  while  scarcely 
any  thing  of  this  kind  was  to  be  found  in  the  Temple. 
Now,  in  all  these  respects,  and  in  many  more  which 
might  be  mentioned,  the  Christian  Church  followed 
the  Synagogue  model,  and  departed  from  that  of  the 
Temple.  Could  we  trace  a  resemblance  only  in  one 
or  a  few  points,  it  might  be  considered  as  accidental ; 
but  the  resemblance  is  so  close,  so  striking,  and  extends 
to  so  many  particulars,  as  to  arrest  the  attention  of  the 
most  careless  inquirer.  It  was,  indeed,  notoriously,  so 
great  in  the  early  ages,  that  the  heathen  frequently 
suspected  Christian  Churches  of  being  Jewish  Syna- 
gogues in  disguise,  and  stigmatized  them  as  such 
accordingly. 

And  when  it  is  considered  that  all  the  first  converts 
to  Christianity  were  Jews  ;  that  they  had  been  accus- 
tomed to  the  offices  and  service  of  the  Synagogue 
during  their  whole  lives:  that  they  came  into  the 
Church  with  all  the  feelings  and  habits  connected  with 
their  old  institutions  strongly  prevalent ;  and  that  the 
organization  and  service  of  the  Synagogue  were  of  a 
moral  nature,  in  all  their  leading  characters,  proper  to 
be  adopted  under  any  dispensation ;  while  the  typical 
and  ceromonial  service  of  the  Temple  was  then  done 
away  ; — when  these  things  are  considered,  will  it  no* 


NEW  TESTAMENT  CHURCH.  51 

appear  perfectly  natural  that  the  Apostles,  themselves 
native  Jews,  should  be  disposed  to  make  as  little  change 
in  converting  Synagogues  into  Christian  Churches,  as 
was  consistent  with  the  spirituality  of  the  new  dispen- 
sation ?  That  the  Synagogue  model,  therefore,  should 
be  adopted,  would  seem  beforehand,  to  be  the  most 
probable  of  all  events.  Nor  is  this  a  new  or  sectarian 
notion.  Whoever  looks  into  the  writings  of  some  of  the 
early  Fathers ;  of  the  Reformers ;  and  of  a  large  portion 
of  the  most  learned  men  who  have  adorned  the  Church 
of  Christ,  subsequently  to  the  Reformation,  will  find  a 
very  remarkable  concurrence  of  opinion  that  such  was 
the  model  really  adopted  in  the  organization  of  the 
apostolic  Church.  Most  of  the  distinguished  writers 
whose  names  are  mentioned  in  the  preceding  chapter, 
are,  as  we  have  seen,  unanimous  and  zealous  in  main- 
taining this  position. 

Accordingly,  as  soon  as  we  begin  to  read  of  the 
Aposdes  organizing  Churches  on  the  New  Testament 
plan,  we  find  them  instituting  officers  of  precisely  the 
same  nature,  and  bestowing  on  them,  for  the  most  part, 
the  very  same  titles  to  which  they  had  been  accustomed 
in  the  ordinary  sabbatical  service  under  the  preceding 
economy.  We  find  Bishops,  Elders,  and  Deacons 
every  where  appointed.  We  find  a  plurality  of  Elders 
ordained  in  every  Church.  And  we  find  the  Elders 
represented  as  "overseers,"  or  inspectors  of  the  Church; 
as  "rulers"  in  the  house  of  God;  and  the  members  of 
the  Church  exhorted  to  "obey  them,"  and  "submit"  to 
them,  as  to  persons  charged  with  their  spiritual  interests, 
and  entitled  to  their  affectionate  and  dutiful  reverence. 

The  following  passages  may  be  considered  as  a 
specimen  of  the  New  Testament  representations  on  this 
subject.   And  when  they  had  ordained  them  Elders 


52  TESTIMONY  FROM  THE 

in  every  Church,  and  had  prayed  with  fasting, they 
commended  them  to  the  Lord,  on  whom  they  believed: 
Acts  14.  23.  And  when  they  were  come  to  Jerusalem? 
they  were  received  of  the  Church,  and  of  the  Apostles 
mid  Elders.     And  the  Apostles  and  Elders  came 
together  to  consider  of  this  matter ;  Acts  15.  4,  6. 
And  from  Miletus,  he  (Paul)  sent  to  Ephesus,  and, 
called  the  Elders  of  the  Church;  and  when  they 
were  come  unto  him,  he  said  unto  them,  take  heed 
unto  yourselves,  and  to  all  the  flock,  over  which  the 
Holy  Ghost  hath  made  you  overseers  ;  Acts  20? 
20,  "28.     Is  any  sick  among  you?     Let  him  call  for 
the  Elders  of  the  Church;  and  let  them  pray  over 
him.  $%c;  James  5,  14.      The  Elders  which  are 
among  you  I  exhort,  who  am  also  an  Elder,  and 
a  witness  of  the  sufferings  of  Christ  and  also  a 
partaker  of  the  glory  that  shall  be  revealed.     Feed 
the  flock  of  God  that  is  among  you,  taking  the  over- 
sight thereof,  not  by  constraint,  but  willingly: 
not  for  filthy  lucre,  but  of  a  ready  mind;  neither  as 
being  Lords  over  God's  heritage,  but  being  ensam- 
ples  to  the  flock;  1  Peter  v.  1,  2,  3.     For  this  cause 
left  1  thee  in  Crete,  that  thou  shouldest  set  in  order 
the  things  that  are  wanting,  and  ordain  Elders  in 
every  city,  as  I  had  appointed  thee;  Titus  i.  5.   Obey 
them  that  have  the  rule  over  you,,  and  submit 
yourselves,  for  they  watch  for  your  souls  as  they 
that  must  give  account;  Hebrews  13,  17.     And  we 
beseech  you,   brethren,  to  know  them  which  labor 
among  you,  and  are  over  you  in  the  Lord,  and 
admonish  you,  and  to  esteem  them  very  highly  in 
love  for  their  work  sake;  1  Thessalonians  v.  12,  13. 
Let  the  Elders  that  ride  well  be  accounted  worthy 
of  double  honor,  especially  they  who  labor  in  thq 


NEW    TESTAMENT   CHURCH.  53 

word  and  doctrine;  1  Tim.  v.  17.  To  whatever 
Church  our  attention  is  directed,  in  the  inspired  history, 
we  find  in  it  a  plurality  of  Elders; — we  find  the 
mass  of  the  Church  members  spoken  of  as  under  their 
authority ; — and  while  the  people  are  exhorted  to 
submit  to  their  rule,  with  all  readiness  and  affection ; 
these  rulers  are  commanded,  in  the  name  of  Christ, 
to  exercise  the  power  vested  in  them  by  the  great 
Head  of  the  Church,  with  firmness,  and  fidelity,  and 
yet  with  disinterestedness  and  moderation,  so  as  to 
promote  most  effectually,  the  purity  and  order  of  the 
flock. 

The  circumstance  of  our  finding  it  so  uniformly  stated 
that  there  was  a  plurality  of  Elders  ordained  in  every 
Church,  is  certainly  worthy  of  particular  attention  here. 
If  there  had  been  a  plurality  of  these  officers  appointed 
only  in  some  of  the  more  populous  cities,  where  there 
were  probably  several  worshipping  assemblies  ;  where 
the  congregations  may  be  supposed  to  have  been  unu- 
sually large ;  and  where  it  was  important,  of  course,  to 
have  more  than  a  single  preacher ;  then  we  might  con- 
sider this  fact  as  very  well  reconcileable  with  the  doc- 
trine of  those  who  assert,  that  all  the  Elders  in  the 
apostolic  Church,  were  official  teachers.  But  as  both 
the  direction  and  the  practice  were  to  ordain  Elders, 
that  is,  more  than  one,  at  least,  in  every  Church,  small 
as  well  as  great,  there  is,  evidently,  very  strong  presump- 
tion that  it  was  intended  to  conform  to  the  Synagogue 
model;  and  if  so,  that  the  whole  of  the  number  so 
ordained  cpuld  not  be  necessary  for  the  purpose  of  public 
instruction;  but  that  some  were  rulers,  who,  as  in  the 
Synagogue,  formed  a  kind  of  congregational  Presbytery, 
or  consistory,  for  the  government  of  the  Church.  The 
idea  that  it  was  considered  as  necessary,  at  such  a  time, 

e2 


54  TESTIMONY  FROM  THE 

tha  every  Church  should  have  two,  three,, or  four fW- 
iors:  or  Ministers,  in  the  modern  popular  sense  of  those 
terms,  is  manifestly  altogether  inadmissible,  But  if  a 
majority  of  these  Elders,  whatever  their  ordination  or 
authority  might  be,  were  in  fact  employed,  not  in  teach- 
ing, but  in  ruling,  all  difficulty  vanishes  at  once. 

Accordingly,  the  learned  Vilringa,  before  mentioned, 
whose  authority  is  much  relied  upon  to  disprove  the 
existence  of  the  office  of  Ruling  Elder  in  the  primitive 
Church,  explicitly  acknowledges,  not  only  that  there 
was  then  a  plurality  of  Elders  in  every  Church ;  but 
that,  as  in  the  Synagogue,  the  greater  part  of  these 
were,  in  fact,  employed  in  ruling  only ;  and  that 
although  all  of  them  were  set  apart  to  their  office  in  the 
same  manner,  and  were,  ecclesiastically,  of  the  same 
rank;  yet  a  majority  of  them,  from  want  of  suitable 
qualifications,  were  not  fitted  to  be  public  preachers,  and 
seldom  or  never  attempted  this  part  of  the  service.* 

But  there  are  distinct  passages  of  Scripture,  which 
have  been  deemed,  by  some  of  the  most  impartial  and 
competent  interpreters,  very  plainly  to  point  out  the 
class  of  Elders  now  under  consideration. 

In  Romans  xii.  6,  7,  8,  the  Apostle  exhorts  as  fol- 
lows:— Having  then  gifts,  differing  according  to  the 
grace  given  to  us:  whether  prophecy,  let  us  prophesy 
according  to  the  proportion  of  faith;  or  ministry, 
let  us  wait  on  our  ministering ;  or  he  that  teacheth 
on  teaching;  or  he  that  exhorteth  on  exhortation; 
he  that  giveth,  let  him  do  it  with  simplicity;  he 
that  ruleth,  with  diligence;  he  that  sheweth 
mercy,  with  cheerfulness.  With  this  passage  may  be 
comiected  another,  of  similar  character,  and  to  be  inter- 


*  Vitringa  De  Synagoga  Vetere.     Lib.  ii.  Chap.  ii. 


NEW  TESTAMENT  CHURCH.  55 

preted  on  tlie  same  principles.  In  I  Corinthians  xii. 
2S,  we  are  told, —  God  hath  set  some  in  the  Church . 
first  Apostles,  secondarily  Prophets,  thirdly  Teach- 
ers, after  that  miracles,  then  gifts  of  healing,  helps, 
governments,  diversities  of  tongues.  In  both  these 
passages  there  is  a  reference  to  the  different  offices  and 
gifts  bestowed  on  the  Church  by  her  divine  King  and 
Head :  in  both  of  them  there  is  a  plain  designation  of 
an  office  for  ruling  or  government,  distinct  from  that 
of  teaching:  and  in  both,  also,  this  office  evidently  has 
a  place  assigned  to  it  below  that  of  Pastors  and  Teach- 
ers. Now,  this  office,  by  whatever  name  it  may  be 
called,  or  whatever  doubts  may  be  started  as  to  some 
minor  questions  respecting  its  powers  and  investiture,  is 
substantially  the  same  with  that  which  Presbyterians 
distinguish  by  the  title  of  Riding  Elder. 

Some,  indeed,  have  said  that  the  Apostle  in  1  Cor, 
xii.  28,  is  not  speaking  of  distinct  offices.,  but  of  different 
duties,  devolving  on  the  Church  as  a  body.  But  no 
one,  it  is  believed,  who  impartially  considers  the  whole 
passage,  can  adopt  this  opinion.  In  the  whole  of  the 
context,  from  the  12th  verse,  the  Apostle  is  speaking  of 
the  Church  of  God  under  the  emblem  of  a  body,  and 
affirms  that,  in  this  body,  there  is  a  variety  of  members 
adapted  to  the  comfort  and  convenience  of  the  whole 
body.  For  the  body,  says  he,  is  not  one  member,  but 
many.  If  the  foot  shall  say,  Because  I  am  not  the 
hand,  lam  not  of  the  body,  is  it,  therefore,  not  of  the 
body  7  And  if  the  ear  shall  say,  Because  I  am  not 
the  eye,  lam  not  of  the  body,  is  it,  therefore,  not  of 
the  body  7  If  the  whole  body  were  an  eye,  where 
were  the  hearing  ?  If  the  whole  ivere  hearing,  where 
were  the  smelling?  But i now  hath  God  set  the 
members  every  one  of  them  in  the  body  as  it  hath 


56  TESTIMONY  FROM  THE 

pleased  him.  And  if  they  were  all  one  member, 
where  were  the  body  ?  Plainly  implying  that  in  every 
ecclesiastical,  as  well  as  in  eveiy  natural  body,  there 
are  different  functions  and  offices:  that  all  cannot  be 
teachers:  that  all  cannot  be  governors,  or  govern- 
ments; but  that  to  each  and  every  functionary  is 
assigned  his  proper  work  and  duty. 

Nor  is  this  interpretation  of  the  Apostle  confined  to 

Presbyterians.      Peter  Martyr,  the  learned  Italian 

reformer,  interprets  the  passage  before  us  just  as  we 

have  done.     In  his  Commentary  on  1  Cor.  xii.  28,  he 

speaks  thus:  "  Governments.    Those  who  are  honored 

with  this  function,  are  such  as  were  fitted  for  the  work 

of  government,  and  who  know  how  to  conduct  every 

thing  relating  to  discipline  righteously  and  prudently, 

For  the  Church  of  Christ  had  its  government.     And 

because  a  single  pastor  was  not  able  to  accomplish  every 

thing  himself,  there  were  joined  with  him,  in  the  ancient 

Church,  certain  Elders,  chosen  from  among  the  people, 

well-informed,   and  skilled  in   spiritual   things,   who 

formed  a  kind  of  parochial  Senate.     These,  with  the 

pastor,  deliberated  on  every  matter  relating  to  the  care 

and  edification  of  the  Church.     Which  thing  Ambrose 

makes  mention  of  in  writing  on  the  Epistle  to  Timothy. 

Among  these  Elders  the  Pastor  took  the  lead,  not  as  a 

tyrant,  but  rather  as  a  Consul  presiding  in  a  council  of 

Senators."    Many  Episcopalians  and  others  find  in 

the  passage  the  same  sense.     The  Reverend  Herbert 

Thomdike,  before  quoted,  a  learned   divine  of  the 

Church  of  England,  who  lived  in  the  reign  of  Charles 

I.,  speaks  thus  of  the  passage  last  cited.     "  There  is  no 

reason  to  doubt,  that  the  men  whom  the  Apostle, 

1  Cor.  12,  28,  and  Ephes.  4,  11,  called  Doctors,  or 

Teachers,  are  those  of  the  Presbyters,  who  had  the 


NEW  TESTAMENT  CHURCH.  57 

abilities  of  preaching  and  teaching  the  people  at  their 
assemblies.  That  those  of  the  Presbyters  who  preached 
not,  are  called  here  by  the  Apostle,  governments ;  and 
the  Deacons,  awiXi^as,  that  is,  helps,  or  assistants  to 
the  Government  of  Presbyters ;  so  that  it  is  not  to  be 
translated  helps  in  governments,  but  helps,  govern- 
ments, &c.  There  were  two  parts  of  the  Presbyter's 
office,  viz.,  teaching  and  governing,  the  one  whereof 
some  attained  not,  even  in  the  Apostle's  times."* 

But  there  is  a  still  more  pointed  reference  to  this  class 
of  Elders  in  1  Timothy  v.  17.  Let  the  Elders  that 
ride  well  be  counted  worthy  of  double  honor,  especially 
they  who  labor  in  the  word  and  doctrine.  It  would 
seem  that  every  person  of  plain  common  sense,  who 
had  never  heard  of  any  diversity  of  opinion  on  the  sub- 
ject, would,  without  hesitation,  conclude,  on  reading 
this  passage,  that,  at  the  period  in  which  it  was  written, 
there  were  tvjo  kinds  of  Elders,  one  whose  duty  it  was 
to  labor  in  the  word  and  doctrine,  and  another  who 
did  not  thus  labor,  but  only  ruled  in  the  Church.  The 
Apostle  declares  that  Elders  who  rule  well  are  worthy 
of  double  honor,  but  especially  those  who  labor  in 
the  word  and  doctrine.  Now,  if  we  suppose  that  there 
was  only  one  class  of  Elders  then  in  the  Church,  and 
that  they  were  all  teachers,  or  laborers  in  the  word 
and  doctrine,  we  make  the  inspired  Apostle  speak  in  a 
manner  utterly  unworthy  of  his  high  character.  There 
was,  therefore,  a  class  of  Elders  in  the  apostolic  Church 
who  did  not,  infact^  or,  at  any  rate,  ordinarily,  preach, 
or  ad  minister  sacraments,  but  assisted  in  government; — 
in  other  words,  Riding  Elders. 

For  this  construction  of  the  passage,  Dr.  Whitakerh 


*  discourse  of  Religious  Assemblies.     Chap.  iv.  p.  117, 


58  TESTIMONY  FROM  THE 

a  zealous  and  learned  Episcopal  divine,  and  Regius 
Professor  of  Divinity  in  the  University  of  Cambridge, 
of  whom  Bishop  Hall  remarks,  that  "  no  man  ever 
saw   him  without  reverence,  or  heard  him   without 
wonder" — very  warmly  contends — "By  these  words,'' 
says  he,  "  the  Apostles  evidently  distinguishes  between 
the  Bishops  and  the  Inspectors  of  the  Church.     If  all 
who  rule  well  be  worthy  of  double  honor,  especially 
they  who  labor  in  the  word  and  doctrine,  it  is  plain  that 
there  was  some  who  did  not  so  labor ;  for  if  all  had 
been  of  this  description,  the  meaning  would  have  been 
absurd ;  but  the  word  especially  points  out  a  difference. 
If  I  should  say  that  all  who  study  well  at  the  University 
are  worthy  of  double  honor,  especially  they  who  labor 
in  the  study  of  theology,  I  must  either  mean,  that  all 
do  not  apply  themselves  to  the  study  of  Theology,  or 
I  should  speak  nonsense.     Wherefore  I  confess  that  to 
be  the  most  genuine  sense  by  which  Pastors  and  Teach- 
ers are  distinguished  from  those  who  only  governed; 
Romans,  xii.  8.      Of  this  class  of  Elders  Ambrose 
speaks  in  his  commentary  on  1  Timothy  5,  1.'"* 

The  learned  and  venerable  Dr.  Owen,  gives  his 
opinion  of  the  import  of  this  passage,  in  still  more  pointed 
language.  "This  is  a  text,"  says  he,  "of  incontrollable 
evidence,  if  it  had  any  thing  to  conflict  withal  but  pre- 
judice and  interest.  A  rational  man,  who  is  unpreju- 
diced, who  never  heard  of  the  controversy  about  Ruling 
Elders,  can  hardly  avoid  an  apprehension  that  there  are 
two  sorts  of  Elders,  some  who  labor  in  the  word  and 
doctrine,  and  some  who  do  not  so  do.  The  truth  is,  it 
was  interest  and  prejudice  which  first  caused  some 

*  Prcelectionea,  as   quoted  in  Calderwood's    Altars  Da- 
mascenum,  p.  681, 


NEW  TESTAMENT  CHURCH.  59 

learned  men  to  strain  their  wits  to  find  out  evasions 
from  the  evidence  of  this  testimony.  Being  found  out, 
some  others,  of  meaner  abilities,  have  been  entangled, 
by  them. — There  are  Elders,  then,  in  the  Church. 
There  are,  or  ought  to  be  so  in  every  Church.  With 
these  Elders  the  whole  rule  of  the  Church  is  intrusted. 
All  these,  and  only  they,  do  rule  ink."* 

Equally  to  our  purpose  is  the  judgment  of  that  acute 
and  learned  Episcopal  divine,  Dr.  Whitby,  in  his  Com- 
mentary on  this  passage: — "The  Elders  of  the  Jews." 
says  he,  "were  of  two  sorts ;  1st,  such  as  governed  in 
the  Synagogue,  and  2dly,  such  as  ministered  in  read- 
ing and   expounding  their  scriptures  and  traditions, 
and   from  them,  pronouncing  what  did  bind  or  loose, 
or  what  was  forbidden,  and  what  was  lawful  to  be  done. 
For  when,  pawly  by  their  captivity,  and  partly  through 
increase  of  traffic,  they  were  dispersed  in  considerable 
bodies  through  divers   regions  of   the  world,  it  was 
necessary  that  they  should  have  governors  or  magis- 
trates to  keep  them  in  their  duty,  and  judge  of  criminal 
causes;  and  also  Rabbins,  to  teach  them  the  law,  anc 
the  tradition  of  their  fathers.     Theirs*  were  ordainet 
ad  judicandum,  sed  non  ad  docendum  de  licitis  et 
vetitis,  i.  e.  to  judge  and  govern,  but   not  to  teach. 
The  second,  ad  docendum,  sed  non  ad  judicandum, 
i.  e.  to  teach,  but  not  to  judge  or  govern."     "And  these 
the  Apostle  here  declares  to  be  the  most  honorable,  and 
worthy   of   the   chiefest   reward.      Accordingly,    the 
Apostle,  reckoning  up  the  officers  God  had  appointed 
in  the  Church,  places  teachers  before  governments; 
I  Cor.  xii.28." 
I  am  aware  that  a  number  of  glosses  have  been 

*  True  Nature  of  a  Gospel  Church.     Chapter  ?ii.  p.  141, 
142,  143. 


60  TESTIMONY  FROM   THE 

adopted  to  set  aside  the  testimony  of  this  cogent  text 
in  favor  of  Ruling  Elders.  To  enumerate  and  show 
the  invalidity  of  them  all,  would  be  inconsistent  with 
the  limits  to  which  this  manual  is  restricted.  But  a 
few  of  the  most  plausible  and  popular  may  be  deemed 
worthy  of  notice. 

Some,  for  example,  have  said,  that,  by  the  Elders 
that  rule  well  in  this  passage,  civil  magistrates  are 
intended  5  while,  by  those  who  labor  in  the  word  and 
doctrine,  ministers  of  the  gospel  are  pointed  out.  But 
it  will  occur  to  every  reflecting  reader  that,  at  the  time 
when  the  passage  of  Scripture  under  consideration  was 
addressed  to  Timothy,  and  for  several  centuries  after- 
wards, there  were  no  Christian  Magistrates  in  the 
Church;  and  to  suppose  that  the  Church  is  exhorted  to 
choose  heathen  judges  or  magistrates,  to  compose  dif- 
ferences, and  maintain  order  among  the  followers  of 
Christ,  is  in  the  highest  degree  improbable,  not  to  say 
altogether  absurd. 

Others  have  alleged,  that  by  the  Elders  that  ride 
well  are  meant  Deacons.  It  is  enough  to  reply  to  this 
suggestion,  that  it  has  never  been  shown,  or  can  be 
shown,  that  Deacons  are  any  where  in  the  New  Tes- 
tament distinguished  by  the  title  of  Elders ;  and, 
further,  that  the  function  of  ruling'  is  no  where  repre- 
sented as  belonging  to  their  office.  They  were  appoint- 
ed Aiaxovsiv  <r£atfs£ai£,  to  serve  tables;  Acts  vi.  2,  3 ; — 
but  not  to  act  as  riders  in  the  house  of  God. — Of  this, 
however,  more  in  a  subsequent  chapter. 

A  third  class  of  objectors  contend,  that  the  word 
fmTusra,  which  our  translators  have  rendered  especially, 
ought  to  be  translated  much.  That  it  is  not  to  be 
considered  as  distinguishing  one  class  of  Elders  from 
another;   but  as  marking  intensity  of  degree;  "in 


NEW   TESTAMENT    CHURCH.  01 

other  words,  that  it  is  meant  to  be  exegetical  of  those 
who  rule  well,  viz:  those  who  labor  much,  or  with 
peculiar  diligence,  in  the  word  and  doctrine.  On  this 
plan,  the  verse  in  question  would  read  thus: — Let  the 
Elders  who  ride  well,  that  is  who  labor  much  in  the 
word  and  doctrine,  be  accounted  worthy  of  double 
honor.  If  this  were  adopted  as  the  meaning  of  the 
passage,  it  would  go  to  show,  that  it  is  for  preaching 
alone,  and  not  for  ruling  well,  that  Elders  are  entitled 
to  honor.  But  is  it  rational  or  consistent  with  other 
parts  of  Scripture,  to  suppose  that  no  honor  is  due  to  the 
latter?  It  has  also  been  contended,  by  excellent  Greek 
critics,  that  the  structure  of  the  sentence  will  not, 
naturally,  bear  this  interpretation.  It  is  not  said,  Si 
fxaXigra  xo-mwvrss,  as  would  have  been  the  proper  order 
of  the  words,  if  such  had  been  the  meaning  intended 
to  be  conveyed ;  but  |xaX<sTa  61  xoirjwvrsg : — not  those  who 
labor  with  especial  diligence  and  exertion :  but  especially 
those  who  labor,  &c.  But  the  most  decisive  con- 
sideration is,  that  not  a  single  case  can  be  found,  in 
the  New  Testament,  in  which  the  word  fxaXisra  has 
the  signification  here  attributed  to  it.  It  is  so  gene- 
rally used  to  distinguish  one  class  of  objects  from 
another,  that  we  may  safely  venture  to  say,  it  cannot 
possibly  have  a  different  meaning  in  the  passage  be- 
fore us.  A  few  decisive  examples  will  be  sufficient. 
In  the  same  chapter,  from  which  the  passage  under 
consideration  is  taken,  (1  Tim.  v.  8,)  it  is  said:  If  any 
man  provide  not  for  his  oxen,  and  especially  (jmaXigra) 
for  those  of  his  own  house,  he  hath  denied  the  faith, 
<^c.  Again;  Gal.  iv.  10 : — Let  us* do  good  unto  all 
men,  but  especially  (fjiaXisra)  unto  them  who  are  of 
the  household  of  faith.  Again;  Philip.  4,  22; — All 
the  saints  salute  you,  chiefly  (/AaXisra)  they  of  Ccesafs 


62  testimony  trom  t&£ 

household. — Thus,  also,  2  Tim.  iv.  13: — When  thou 
comest,  bring  with  thee  the  books,  but  especially 
(ixoLktiru)  the  parchments.  Further;  1  Tim.  iv.  10: 
Who  is  the  Saviour  of  all  men,  especially  (fxaX^ra) 
of  those  who  believe.  Again;  Titus  i.  10: — For  there 
any  many  unruly  and  vain  talkers,  especially 
(fxaXig<ra)  they  of  the  circumcision.  Now,  in  all  these 
cases,  there  are  two  classes  of  objects  intended  to  be 
distinguished  from  each  other.  Some  of  the  saints 
were  of  Ccesafs  household,  and  others  were  not.  Good 
was  to  be  done  to  all  men;  but  all  were  not  believers. 
There  were  many  vain  and  unruly  talkers  alluded 
to,  but  they  were  not  all  of  the  circumcision:  and  so 
of  the  rest. 

A  fourth  class  of  objectors  to  our  construction  of  this 
passage,  are  certain  prelatists,  who  allege,  that  by  the 
Elders  that  rule  well,  the  Apostle  intends  to  designate 
superannuated  Bishops,  who  though  too  old  to  labor 
in  the  word  and  doctrine,  were  still  able  to  assist  in 
ruling.  To  this  it  is  sufficient  to  reply,  that,  whether 
we  understand  the  "  honor"  (<npis)  to  which  the  Apostle 
refers,  as  intended  to  designate  pecuniary  support,  or 
rank  and  dignity,  it  would  seem  contrary  to  every 
principle,  both  of  reason  and  Scripture,  that  younger 
and  more  vigorous  laborers  in  the  word  and  doctrine, 
should  have  a  portion  of  this  honor  awarded  to  them, 
superior  to  that  which  is  yielded  to  those  who  have 
become  worn  out  in  the  same  kind  of  service.  These 
aged,  venerable,  and  exhausted  dignitaries,  according 
to  this  construction,  are  to  be,  indeed,  much  honored, 
but  less  than  their  junior  brethren,  whose  strength  for 
labor  still  continues. 

A  further  objection  made  to  our  construction  of  this 
passage  is,  that  when  the  Apostle  speaks  of  double 


NEW  TESTAMENT   CHURCH.  63 

Ivonor  (<WX?)s  rt(iw)  as  due  to  those  who  ride  well,  he 
refers,  not  to  respect  and  regard,  but  to  temporal 
support*  Now,  say  this  class  of  objectors,  as  Presby- 
terians never  give  salaries  to  their  Ruling  Elders,  they 
cannot  be  the  kind  of  officers  contemplated  by  the 
sacred  writer  in  this  place.  But  is  it  certain  that  by  the 
original  term  here  translated  "honor,"  salary,  or 
maintenance,  is  really  intended?  Why  not  assign  to 
the  word  tfjfxr)  its  more  common  signification,  viz.: 
honor,  high  respect)  reverence?  It  is  common  to  say, 
that  the  illustration  contained  in  the  18th  verse. — 
Thau  shall  not.  muzzle  the  ox  that  treadeth  out  the 
com;  and  the  laborer  is  worthy  of  his  reward, 
seem  to  fix  the  meaning  to  temporal  support.  But 
those  illustrations  only  carry  with  them  the  general 
idea  of  reward;  and  surely  a  reward  may  be  of  the 
moral  as  well  as  of  the  pecuniary  kind.  But  supposing 
the  inspired  Apostle  really  to  mean  double,  that  is 
liberal  maintenance,  still  this  interpretation  does  not  at 
all  militate  against  our  doctrine.  It  might  have  been 
very  proper,  in  the  days  of  Paid,  to  give  all  the  Elders 

*  It  is  worthy  of  notice  that  Calvin,  in  his  Commentary  on 
this  place,  gives  the  following  view  of  the  Apostle's  meaning 
when  he  speaks  of  double  honor.  "  When  Chrysostom  inter- 
prets the  phrase  double  honor,  as  importing  support  and  rever- 
ence., I  do  not  impugn  his  opinion.  Let  those  adopt  it  who  think 
proper.  But  to  rne  it  appears  more  probable  that  a  comparison 
is  here  intended  between  Widows  and  Elders.  Paul  had  just 
before  commanded  to  have  Widows  in  honor.  But  Elders  are 
still  more  worthy  of  honor  than  they.  Wherefore  to  these  double 
honor  is  to  be  given."  This  interpretation  is  natural,  and  con- 
sistent. "  Honor  Widows,  says  the  Apostle,  that  are  widows 
indeed;"  but  "  let  the  Elders  that  rule  well  be  counted  worthy  of 
double  honor,  especially  those  that  labor  in  the  word  and  doc~ 
trine."  The  same  word  is  used  to  express  honor,  in  both  cases. 


64  TESTIMONY  FROM   THE 

a  decent  temporal  support,  as  a  reward  for  their  services. 
But  if  any  Elders  chose  to  decline  receiving  a  regular 
stipend,  as  Paul  himself  seems  to  have  done,  he  surely 
did  not,  by  this  disinterestedness,  forfeit  his  office.  It 
may  be  that  Ruling  Elders  ought  now  to  receive  a 
compensation  for  their  services,  especially  when  they 
devote  to  the  Church  a  large  part  of  their  time  and 
talents.  But  if  any  are  willing  to  render  their  services 
gratuitously,  whether  they  be  ruling'  or  preaching 
Elders,  eveiy  one  sees  that  this  cannot  destroy,  or  even 
impair  their  official  standing. 

Accordingly,  it  will  be  seen  in  the  sequel,  that  there 
is  a  concurrence  of  sentiment,  in  favor  of  our  construc- 
tion of  this  celebrated  passage  in  Timothy,  among  the 
most  distinguished  divines  of  all  denominations,  Protest- 
ant and  Catholic,  Lutheran  and  Reformed,  truly 
remarkable,  and  affording  a  very  strong  presumptive 
argument  in  favor  of  its  correctness. 

There  is  another  class  of  passages,  already  quoted  in 
a  former  part  of  this  chapter,  which  is  entitled  to  more 
formal  consideration.  I  mean  such  as  that  found  in 
1  Thessalonians  v.  12,  13.  "And  we  beseech  you 
brethren,  to  know  them  which  labor  among  you,  and 
are  over  you  in  the  Lord,  and  admonish  you;  and  to 
esteem  them  very  highly  in  love  for  their  works  sake." 
Such  also  as  that  found  in  Hebrews  xiii.  17.  "Obey 
them  that  have  the  rule  over  you,  and  submit  yourselves ; 
for  they  watch  for  your  souls  as  they  that  must  give 
account,"  &c.  Here  the  inspired  writer  is  evidently 
speaking  of  particular  Churches.  He  represents  them 
as  each  having  a  body  of  Rulers  "set  over  them  in  the 
Lord,"  who  "watch  over  them,"  and  whom  they  are 
bound  to  "obey."  In  short,  we  find  a  set  of  officers 
spoken  of,  who  are  not  merely  to  instruct,  and  exhort. 


NEW    TESTAMENT    CHURCH.  65 

but  to  exercise  official  authority  in  the  Church.  Now 
this  representation  can  be  made  to  agree  with  no  other 
form  of  government  than  that  of  the  Presbyterian 
Church.  Not  with  Prelacy;  for  that  presents  no  ruler 
in  any  single  Church  but  the  Rector  only.  It  knows 
nothing  of  a  Parochial  Council,  or  Senate,  who  conduct 
discipline,  and  perform  all  the  duties  of  spiritual  rule. 
Not  with  Independency;  for  according  to  the  essential 
principles  of  that  system,  the  body  of  the  communicants 
are  all  equally  rulers,  and  even  the  Pastor  is  only  the 
chairman,  or  president,  not  properly  the  Ruler  of  the 
Church.  But  with  the  Presbyterian  form  of  Church 
government,  in  which  every  congregation  is  furnished 
with  a  bench  of  spiritual  Rulers,  whom  the  people  are 
bound  to  reverence  and  obey,  it  agrees  perfectly. 

There  is  only  one  passage  more  which  will  be  ad- 
duced in  support  of  the  class  of  Elders  before  us.  This 
is  found  in  Matthew  xviii.  15,  16,  17.  Here  it  is  be- 
lieved that  the  17th  verse,  which  enjoins — Tell  it  to 
the  Church — has  evidently  a  reference  to  the  plan  of 
discipline  known  to  have  been  pursued  in  the  Jewish 
Synagogue;  and  that  the  meaning  is,  "Tell  it  to  that 
Consistory  or  Judicatory,  which  is  the  Church  acting 
by  its  representatives."  It  is  true,  indeed,  that  some 
Independents,  of  more  zeal  than  caution,  have  confi- 
dently quoted  this  passage  as  making  decisively  in  favor 
of  their  scheme  of  popular  government.  But  when 
carefully  examined,  it  will  be  found  not  only  by  no 
means  to  answer  their  purpose;  but  rather  to  support 
the  Presbyterian  cause.  We  must  always  interpret 
language  agreeably  to  the  well  known  understanding 
and  habit  of  the  time  and  the  country  in  which  it  is  de- 
livered. Now,  it  is  perfectly  certain  that  the  phrase — 
"Tell  it  to  the  Church" — was  constantly  in  use  among 

f2 


66  TESTIMONY  FROM    THE 

the  Jews  to  express  the  carrying  a  complaint  to  the 
Eldership  or  representatives  of  the  Church.  And  it 
is  quite  as  certain,  that  actual  cases  occur  in  the  Old 
Testament  in  which  the  term  Church  (sxxXrjtfja)  is  ap- 
plied to  the  body  of  Elders.  See  as  an  example  of  this, 
Deuteronomy  xxxi.  28,  30,  comparing  our  translation 
with  that  of  the  Seventy,  as  alluded  to  in  a  preceding 
chapter.  We  can  scarcely  avoid  the  conclusion,  then, 
that  our  blessed  Lord  meant  to  teach  his  disciples,  that, 
as  it  had  been  in  the  Jewish  Synagogue,  so  it  would 
be  in  the  Christian  Church,  that  the  sacred  community 
should  be  governed  by  a  bench  of  Rulers  regularly 
chosen  and  set  apart  for  this  purpose. 

In  support  of  this  construction  of  the  passage  before 
us,  we  have  the  concurring  judgment  of  a  large  ma- 
jority of  Protestant  divines,  of  all  denominations. — We 
have  not  only  the  opinion  of  Calvin,  Beza,  Parceus, 
and  a  great  number  of  distinguished  writers  on  the 
continent  of  Europe :  but  also  of  Lightfoot,  Gooodwi?i, 
and  many  others,  both  ministers  of  the  Church  of 
England,  and  the  Independents  of  that  country.  It  is 
worthy  of  remark,  too,  that  Chrysostom,  known  to  be 
an  eminently  learned  and  accomplished  Father,  of  the 
fourth  century,  evidently  understands  this  passage  in 
the  Gospel  according  to  St.  Matthew,  as  substantially 
agreeing  with  the  views  of  Presbyterians;  or.  at  any 
rate,  as  totally  rejecting  the  Independent  doctrine.  Zan- 
chius,  (in  Quart.  Proecept.)  and  Junius  (Controv.  iii. 
Lib.  ii.  Cap.  vi.)  quote  him  as  asserting,  in  his  Com- 
mentary on  this  place,  that  by  the  Church  to  which 
the  offence  was  to  be  told,  we  are  to  understand  the 
•s-gos^oi  xou  itgosdrursg  of  the  Church. 

It  may  not  be  improper,  before  taking  leave  of  the 
Scriptural  testimony  in  favor   of  Ruling  Elders,  to 


NEW  TESTAMENT  CHURCH.  67 

take  some  notice  of  an  objection  which  has  been  ad- 
vanced with  much  confidence,  but  which,  manifestly; 
when  examined,  will  be  found  destitute  of  the  smallest 
force.  It  has  been  said  that  great  reliance  is  placed  on 
the  word  irgoefrwrss,  found  in  1  Timothy  v.  17,  as  ex- 
pressive of  the  ruling  character  of  the  office  under  con- 
sideration; whereas,  say  these  objectors,  this  very  word, 
as  is  universally  known  and  acknowledged,  is  applied  by 
several  of  the  early  Fathers  to  Teaching  Elder s,io  those 
who  evidently  bore  the  office  of  Pastors  of  Churches, 
and  who  were,  of  course,  not  mere  rulers,  but  also 
"  laborers  in  the  word  and  doctrine"  If,  therefore  this 
title  be  applied  to  those  who  were  confessedly  teachers, 
what  evidence  have  we  that  it  is  intended,  in  any  case, 
to  designate  a  different  class?  This  objection  is  founded 
on  a  total  misrepresentation  of  the  argument  which  it  is 
supposed  to  refute.  The  advocates  of  the  office  of  Ruling 
Elder  do  not  contend  or  believe  that  the  function  of 
riding  is  confined  to  this  class  of  officers.  On  the  con- 
trary, they  suppose  and  teach  that  one  class  of  Elders 
both  ride  and  teach ,  while  the  other  class  rule  only. 
Both,  according  to  the  doctrine  of  the  Presbyterian 
Church,  are  tfpostfrwrsg;  but  one  only  "labor  in  the 
word  and  doctrine."  When,  therefore,  cases  are  found 
in  the  early  records  of  the  Church  in  which  the  presiding 
Elder,  or  Pastor,  is  styled  tfpostfrws,  the  fact  is  in  perfect 
harmony  with  the  usual  argument  from  1  Tim.  v.  17; 
the  import  of  which  we  maintain  to  be  this: — Let  all 
the  Elders  that  rule  well,  be  counted  worthy  of  double 
honor,  especially  those  of  their  number  who,  besides 
ruling,  besides  acting  as  npoearurEs,  in  common  with 
the  others,  also  labor  in  the  word  and  doctrine. 

It  has  also  been  contended  that  the  whole  doctrine  of 
the  Ruling,  as  distinct  from  the  Teaching  Elder,  tends 


68  TESTIMONY  FROM  THE 

to  weaken,  if  not  wholly  to  destroy,  the  Presbyterian 
argument  in  favor  of  parity  in  the  Gospel  ministry, 
drawn  from  the  fact,  that  both  Scripture  and  early  Chris- 
tian antiquity  represent  Bishop  and  Presbyter  as  con- 
vertible titles  for  the  same  office.  Presbyterians  maintain, 
and  I  have  no  doubt,  with  perfect  truth,  that,  in  the 
language  of  the  New  Testament,  a  Bishop  means  the 
Pastor ,  or  Overseer  of  a  single  Church  or  parish ;  that 
Bishop  and  Presbyter  are  not  titles  which  imply  dif- 
ferent grades  of  office;  but  that  a  Presbyter  or  Elder 
who  has  a  pastoral  charge,  who  is  the  overseer  of  a 
flock,  is  a  Scriptural  Bishop,  and  holds  the  highest  office 
that  Christ  has  instituted  in  his  Church.  Now,  it  has 
been  alleged  by  the  opponents  of  Ruling  Elder '5,  that  to 
represent  the  Scriptures  as  holding  forth  two  classes 
of  Elders,  one  class  as  both  teaching  and  ruling,  and 
the  other  as  ruling  only — and,  consequently,  the  latter 
as  holding  a  station  not  exactly  identical  with  the 
former; — amounts  to  a  virtual  surrender  of  the  argu- 
ment derived  from  the  identity  of  Bishop  and  Pres- 
byter. 

This  objection,  however,  is  totally  groundless.  If 
we  suppose  Elder,  as  used  in  Scripture,  to  be  a  generic 
term,  comprehending  all  who  bore  rule  in  the  Church: 
and  if  we  consider  the  term  Bishop,  as  also  a  generic 
term,  including  all  who  sustained  the  relation  of  official 
inspectors  or  overseers  of  a  flock ; — then  it  is  plain 
that  all  Bishops  were  Scriptural  Elders;  and  that  all 
Elders,  whether  both  teachers  and  rulers,  or  rulers 
only,  provided  they  were  placed  over  a  parish,  as  in- 
spectors or  overseers,  were  Scriptural  Bishops.  Now 
this,  I  have  no  doubt,  was  the  fact.  When,  therefore, 
the  Apostle  Paul,  in  writing  to  the  Church  at  Philippi, 
addresses   the  Bishops  and  Deacons;  and  when  in 


NEW  TESTAMENT  CHURCH.  69 

his  conference  with  the  Elders  of  the  Church  of  Ephe- 
sus,  at  Miletus,  he  speaks  of  them  all  equally  as  Over- 
seers, or,  as  it  is  in  the  original.  Bishops  (Etfurxo-rous)  of 
that  Church,  I  take  for  granted  he  included  the  rulers 
as  well  as  the  teachers,  in  both  instances.  In  a  word, 
I  suppose  that,  in  every  truly  primitive  and  apostolic 
Church,  there  was  a  bench  of  Elders,  or  Overseers, 
who  presided  over  all  the  spiritual  interests  of  the  con- 
gregation; that,  generally,  a  small  part  only  of  these, 
and  perhaps  seldom  more  than  one,  statedly  preached; 
that  the  rest,  though  probably  ordained  in  the  same 
manner  with  their  colleagues,  very  rarely,  if  ever, 
taught  publicly,  but  were  employed  as  inspectors  and 
rulers,  and  it  may  be,  also,  in  visiting,  catechizing, 
and  instructing  from  house  to  house.  If  this  were  the 
case — and  every  part  of  the  New  Testament  history 
favors  the  supposition — then  nothing  can  be  more 
natural  than  the  language  of  the  inspired  writerss  in 
reference  to  this  whole  subject.  Then  we  readily 
understand  why  the  Apostle  should  say  to  Titus: 
For  this  cause  left  I  thee  in  Crete,  that  thou  shouldest 
set  in  order  the  things  that  are  wanting,  and  ordain 
Elders  in  every  city,  as  I  had  appointed  thee.  If 
any  be  blameless,  fyc;  for  a  bishop  must  be  blame- 
less, as  the  steward  of  God,  fyc.  We  may  then 
perceive,  why  he  speaks  of  a  number  of  Bishops  at 
PhiUppi,  and  a  number  also  at  Ephesus;  and,  in  the 
same  breath,  calls  the  latter  alternately  Bishops  and 
Elders; — and,  on  this  principle,  we  may  see,  no  less 
plainly  why  the  Apostle  Peter  said: — The  Elders 
which  are  among  you  I  exhort,  ivho  am  also  an 
Elder,  and  a  witness  of  the  sufferings  of  Christ, 
and  also  a  partaker  of  the  glory  that  shall  be 
revealed.     Feed  the  flock  of  God  that  is  among  you. 


70  TESTIMONY   FROM    THE 

taking  the  oversight  thereof,  (sflritfxoTwvrss) — acting  as 
Bishops  among  them — not  by  constraint  but  wil- 
lingly;  not  for  filthy  lucre,  but  of  a  ready  mind ; 
neither  as  being  Lords  over  Gods  heritage,  but 
being  ensamples  to  the  flock.  And  accordingly,  it  is 
remarkable  that  the  word  iroiixavare,  used  in  the  second 
verse  of  the  last  quotation,  is  derived  from  a  word  signify- 
ing a  shepherd,  and  carries  with  it  the  ideas  of  guiding, 
protecting  and  ruling,  as  well  as  feeding  in  appro- 
priate spiritual  pastures.  See  MattJtew  ii.  6,  and  Reve- 
lation ii.  27. 

This  view  of  the  subject  takes  away  all  embarrass- 
ment and  difficult j  in  reference  to  the  titles  given  to 
the  primitive  officers  of  the  Church.  There  is  abun- 
dant evidence  that  every  class  of  Elders,  as  well  these 
who  commonly  officiated  as  rulers  only,  as  those  who 
both  ruled  and  taught,  bore  the  names  of  Bishops, 
Inspectors,  Overseers,  during  the  apostolic  age,  and 
for  some  time  afterwards.  This  was  a  name  most 
significantly  expressive  of  their  appropriate  function, 
which  was  to  overlook,  direct  and  rule  each  particular 
Church,  for  its  edification.  How  long  this  title  con- 
tinued to  be  applied  to  all  the  Elders,  indiscriminately, 
it  is  not  easy  to  say.  It  was  probably  in  the  Church,  as 
it  was  known  to  have  been  in  the  Synagogue.  All  the 
rulers  of  the  Synagogue  were  popularly  called  Archi- 
synagogi,  as  is  evident  from  several  passages  in  the 
New  Testament ;  but  sometimes,  as  we  learn  from  the 
same  source,  this  title  was  applied,  by  way  of  eminence^ 
to  the  presiding  or  principal  Ruler  of  each  Synagogue. 
So  with  regard  to  the  title  of  Inspector,  Overseer,  or 
Bishop,  we  know  that  all  the  Elders  of  Ephesus 
(Acts  xx.  17,  28,)  were  indiscriminately  called  Bishops 
by  the  inspired  Paul,    We  know  too  that  the  same 


NEW  TESTAMENT  CHURCH.  71 

Apostle  recognizes  a  plurality  of  Bishops,  or  Overseers, 
in  the  Church  at  Philippi, — (chapter  i.  1.,) — who, 
could  not  posssibly  have  been  Prelates,  as  Episcopalians 
themselves  allow.  We  find,  moreover,  the  same  "chief- 
est  of  the  Apostles,"  giving  the  titles  of  Bishop  and 
Elder,  without  discrimination,  to  all  the  Church  Rulers 
directed  to  be  ordained  in  Ephesus  and  Crete,  as  the 
Epistles  to  Timothy  and  Titus  plainly  evince.  In 
those  pure  and  simple  times  no  difficulty  arose  from  this 
general  application  of  a  plain  and  expressive  title.  For 
more  than  a  hundred  years  after  the  apostolic  age, 
this  title  continued  to  be  frequently  applied  in  the  same 
manner,  as  the  writings  of  Clemens  Romanics,  Her- 
nias, Trencens,  and  others,  amply  testify.  We  find  them 
not  only  speaking  of  the  Elders  as  bearing  rule  in  each 
Church;  but  also  calling  the  same  men,  alternately, 
Bishops,  and  Elders,  as  was  evidently  done  in  apos- 
tolic times.  In  process  of  time,  however,  this  title,  which 
was  originally  considered  as  expressive  of  duty  and 
labor,  rather  than  of  honor,  became  gradually  appro- 
priated to  the  principal  Elder,  who  usually  presided  in 
preaching  and  ordering  the  course  of  the  public  service. 
Not  only  so,  but,  as  a  worldly  and  ambitious  spirit 
gained  ground,  he  who  bore  this  title  began  to  advance 
certain  peculiar  claims; — first  those  of  a  stated  Chair- 
man, President,  or  Moderator  ; — and  finally  those  of  a 
new'  order,  or  grade  of  office.  That  there  was  an 
entire  change  in  the  application  of  the  title  of  Bishop 
not  long  after  the  apostolic  age,  a  majority  of  our  Epis 
copal  brethren  themselves  allow.  They  grant  that  in 
the  New  Testament,  this  title  is  given  indiscriminately 
to  all  who  were  intrusted  with  the  instruction  and  care 
of  the  Church.  But  that,  in  the  succeeding  period,  it 
was  gradually  reserved  to  the  highest  order.     In  other 


72  TESTIMONY  FROM  THE 

words,  they  grant  that  the  title  Bishop  had  a  very  dif- 
ferent meaning  in  the  second  and  third  centuries,  from 
that  which  it  had  borne  in  the  first.  Now,  even  con- 
ceding to  them  that  this  change  took  place  earlier  than 
the  best  records  give  us  reason  to  believe ;  it  may  be 
asked — why  make  such  a  change  at  all?  Why  not 
continue  to  get  along  with  the  language  which  the 
inspired  Apotles  had  authorised  by  their  use?  Why 
insidiously  make  an  old  title,  which  was  familiar  to  the 
popular  ear,  signify  something  very  different  from  what 
it  had  been  wont  to  signify  from  the  beginning ;  and 
thus  palm  a  new  office  with  an  old  name  on  the 
people?  Were  there  no  other  fact  established  by  the 
early  writers  than  this,  it  would  be  quite  sufficient  to 
convince  us  that  the  apostolic  government  of  the  Church 
was  early  corrupted  by  human  ambition. 


CHAPTfift  m 

TESTIMONY    OP   THE    CHRISTIAN    tfATHERSv 

That  which  is  Hot  found  in  the  Bible,  however  fully 
and  strongly  it  may  be  enjoined  elsewhere,  cannot  be 
considered  as  binding  on  the  Church.     On  the  other 
hand,  what  is  plainly  found  in  the  word  of  God,  though 
it  be  no  where  else  taught,  we  are  bound  to  receive. 
Accordingly,  if  we  find  Ruling  Elders   in   the  New 
Testament,  as  it  is  firmly  believed  we  have  done-— it 
matters  not,  as  to  their  substantial  warrant,  how  soon 
after  the  apostolic  age,  they  fell  into  disuse,     Still  if  we 
can  discover  traces  of  them  in  the  early  uninspired 
writings  of  the  Christian  Church,  it  will  certainly  add 
something  to  the  chain  of  proof  which  we  possess  in 
their  favor.     It  will   add  strong  presumption  to  that 
which  is  our  decisive  rule.     Let  us,  then,  see  whether 
the  early  Fathers  say  any  thing  which  can  be  fairly 
considered  as  alluding  to  this  class  of  Church  officers. 
But  before  we  proceed  to  examine  these  witnesses  in 
detail,  it  may  not  be  improper  to  make   two  general 
remarks,  which   ought  to   be  kept  steadily  in  view 
through  the  whole  of  this  branch  of  our  subject. 

The  Jirst  is, — that  we  must  be  on  our  guard  against 
the  ambiguous  use  of  the  title,  Elder,  as  it  is  expressed  in 
different  languages.  When  we  look  into  the  writiDgs 
of  the  Christian  Fathers  who  lived  during  the  first  two 

G 


74  TESTIMONY  OF 

hundred  years  after  Christ,  all  of  whom,  if  we  except 
Tertullian,  wrote  in  Greek,  we  find  them  generally 
using  the  word  vgsoSvrsgos  to  designate  an  Elder.  Now 
this  is  precisely  the  same  word  which  the^advocates  of 
Prelacy  apply  to  the  "second  order,"  as  they  express 
it,  of  their  "clergy,"  always  called  by  them  "Presbyters." 
And  when  Presbyterians  translate  this  word  by  trie  term 
Elder*  and  consider  it  as  used,  at  least  in  many  cases, 
to  designate  that  class  of  officers  which  forms  the  subject 
of  this  Essay,  they  are  considered  and  represented,  by 
some  illiterate  and  narrow  minded  persons,  as  chargeable 
with  an  unfair,  if  not  a  deceptive  use  of  a  term.  This 
charge  is  manifestly  unjust.  It  will  never  be  repeated 
by  any  candid  individual,  who  is  acquainted  with  the 
Greek  language.  This  is  the  very  word  which  is  almost 
invariably  used  by  the  translators  of  the  Septuagint,  all 
through  the  Old  Testament,  to  designate  Elders  who 
confessedly  had  nothing  to  do  with  preaching.  In  truth, 
it  was  a  general  title  of  office  among  the  Jews,  and  it  was 
a  general  title  of  office  among  the  early  Christians,  as 
any  one  will  immediately  perceive  by  a  candid  perusal 
of  the  New  Testament.  And  the  fact  is,  that  if 
Presbyterians  wrote  in  Greek,  they  would  of  course, 
employ  this  very  term  to  express  their  Ruling  Elder. 
The  word  "Elder"  is  the  natural,  literal,  and,  we  may 
almost  say,  the  only  proper  term  by  which  to  express 
the  meaning  of  the  Greek  title  irgsoGvrtgos.  And  even 
when  we  meet  in  some  of  the  early  Fathers  with 
passages  in   which   the   officers   of  the   Church  are 

*  It  is  worthy  of  notice  that  whenever  the  word  ^wCvts^oc 
occurs  in  the  New  Testament,  our  translation,  when  an  eccle- 
siastical officer  is  meant,  always  renders  it  Elder.  So  far  as  is 
recollected,  this  is  invariably  done. 


THE  FATHERS.  75 

enumerated  as  consisting  of  Ewitfxoflroi,  -n^erfgurepoi,  xai 
Ajaoavoi,  it  may  be  said,  with  perfect  truth,  that  if 
Presbyterians,  at  the  present  day,  were  called  upon  to 
enumerate  the  standing  officers  in  all  their  Churches, 
which  are  completely  organized  agreeably  to  their 
public  standards — they  would,  beyond  all  doubt,  if  they 
used  the  Greek  language,  represent  their  regular  eccle- 
siastical officers  as  every  where  consisting  of  Etfjtfxotfo/, 
<7rpstf§u<r££oj,  xai  Aiaxovoi;  meaning  by  tfitfxoros  a  parochial 
Pastor  or  Overseer,  in  which  sense  Prelatists  themselves 
acknowledge  the  title  to  have  been  generally  used  in  the 
apostolic  age;  and  meaning  by  the  title  irgeaSvrs  gog,  a 
Ruling  Elder,  which  we  have  no  doubt  has  been  shown, 
and  will  be  yet  further  shown  to  be,  in  many  cases, 
the  proper  interpretation  of  the  word.  When,  there- 
fore, we  thus  translate  the  word  in  some  of  the  follow- 
ing quotations,  let  no  one  feel  as  if  we  were  taking  an 
unwarrantable  liberty.  No  imputation  of  this  kind, 
assuredly,  will  be  made  by  any  reader  of  competent 
learning  to  judge  in  the  case. 

The  second  preliminary  remark  is,  that,  perhaps, 
no  class  of  Church  officers  would  be,  on  the  whole,  so 
likely  to  fall  into  disrepute  after  the  apostolic  age,  and  be 
discontinued,  as  that  which  is  now  under  consideration. 
We  know  that  the  purity  of  the  Church  began  to  decline 
immediately  after  the  apostolic  age.  Nay,  while  the 
Apostles  were  still  alive,  "the  mystery  of  iniquity"  had 
already  begun  "to  work."  Corruption,  both  in  faith 
and  practice,  had  crept  in,  and,  in  s,ome  places,  to  an 
alarming  and  most  distressing  extent.  And,  after  their 
departure,  it  soon  "came  in  like  a  flood."  The  discipline 
of  the  Church  became  relaxed,  and,  after  a  while,  in 
a  great  measure  prostrated.  The  hints  dropped  by 
several  writers  in  the  second  century,  and  the  strongly 


76  TESTIMONY  OF 

colored  and  revolting  pictures  given  by  Origen  and 
Cyprian,  of  the  state  of  the  Church  in  their  own  times, 
present  a  view  of  this  subject  which  needs  no  comment. 
Now,  in  such  a  state  of  things,  was  it  not  natural  that 
the  office  of  those  whose  peculiar  duty  it  was  to  inspect 
the  members  of  the  Church ;  to  take  cognizance  of  all 
their  aberrations ;  and  to  maintain  a  pure  and  scriptural 
discipline,  should  be  unpopular,  and  finally  as  much 
as  possible  crowded  out  of  public  view,  discredited,  and 
gradually  laid  aside. 

But  this  is  not. all.  Shortly  after  the  apostolic  age, 
several  ecclesiastical  officers,  as  is  confessed  on  all  hands, 
were  either  invented  or  modified,  so  as  to  suit  the  de- 
clining spirituality  of  the  times.  To  mention  but  a 
single  example.  The  Deacons  began  to  claim  higher 
dignity  and  powers.  Sub-Deacons  were  introduced  to 
perform  some  of  those  functions  which  had  originally 
belonged  to  Deacons,  but  which  they  had  become  too 
proud  to  perform.  Was  it  either  unnatural,  then,  or 
improbable — since  things  of  a  similar  kind  actually  took 
place — that  in  the  course  of  the  undeniable  degeneracy 
which  was  now  reigning,  the  Ruling  Elders  of  the 
Church  should  find  the  employment  to  which  they  had 
been  originally  destined,  irksome  both  to  themselves  and 
others;  by  no  means  adapted  to  gratify  either  the  love 
of  gain,  or  the  love  of  pleasure  which  seemed  to  be  the 
order  of  the  day; — and  that  both  parties  gradually 
united  in  dropping  the  inspection  and  discipline  once 
committed  to  their  hands,  and  in  turning  their  attention 
to  objects  more  adapted  to  the  taste  of  ambitious,  worldly 
minded  Church-men.  And  this  result  would  be,  at  once, 
more  likely  to  occur,  and  might  have  occurred  with  less 
opposition  and  noise,if  we  suppose,  as  some  learned  men 
have  done,  that  Ruling  and  Teaching  Elders,  frorr* 


THE  FATHERS.  77 

the  beginning,  not  only  both  bore  the  general  name  of 
Elders,  but  were  both  set  apart  to  their  office  with  the 
same  formalities.  If  this  were  the  case,  then  there  was 
nothing  to  change,  in  virtually  discarding  the  office  of 
Ruling  Elder,  but  graduallyto  neglect  all  their  appro- 
priate duties,  and  in  an  equally  gradual  manner  to  slide 
into  the  assumption  of  duties,  and  especially  that  of 
public  preaching,  which,  in  the  primitive  Church,  they 
had  not  been  expected  to  perform. 

Keeping  these  things  in  mind,  let  us  examine 
whether  some,  both  of  the  early  and  the  late  Fathers, 
do  not  express  themseves  in  a  manner  which  renders 
it  probable,  or  rather  certain,  that  they  had  in  view  the 
class  of  Elders  of  which  we  are  speaking. 

In  the  Epistle  of  Clemens  Romanus,  who  lived 
toward  the  close  of  the  first  century,  to  the  Church  at 
Corinth,  we  find  the  worthy  father  remonstrating  with 
the  members  of  that  Church  for  having  risen  up  against 
their  Elders,  and  thrust  them  out  of  office — perhaps  for 
the  very  reason  just  hinted  at — that  they  found  their 
inspection  and  rule  uncomfortable.  Accordingly  Cle- 
mens addresses  the  Corinthian  Christians  in  the  follow- 
ing manner: — "  It  is  a  shame,  my  beloved,  yea,  a  very 
great  shame,  to  hear  that  the  most  firm  and  ancient 
Church  of  the  Corinthians  should  be  led,  by  one' or  two 
persons,  to  rise  up  against  their  Elders.''1 — (irgsttgwrs^ovs.) 
Again  ;  "  Let  the  flock  of  Christ  enjoy  peace  with  the 
Elders  (irgstgwrsgw)  that  are  set  over  it."  Again ;  u  Do 
ye,  therefore,  who  first  laid  the  foundation  of  this  sedi- 
tion, submit  yourselves  to  your  Elders,  and  be  instruct- 
ed into  repentance,  bending  the  knee  of  your  hearts ;" 
Epist.  47.  54.  57. 

In  these  extracts  we  find  an  entire  coincidence  with 
the  language  of  the  New  Testament;  a  plain  indication 

g  2 


78  TESTIMONY  OF 

that  in  every  Church  there  was  a  plurality  of  Elders; 
and  a  distinct  recognition  of  the  idea  that  these  Elders 
were  rulers,  in  other  words,  held  a  station  of  authority 
and  government  over  "the  flock"  of  which  they  were 
officers. 

In  the  Epistles  of  Ignatius,  who  lived  at  the  close  of 
the  first,  and  the  beginning  of  the  second  century,  we 
find  much  said  about  Elders,  (w^stffiuTs^oi.)   The  follow- 
ing is  a  specimen  of  the  manner  in  which  he  speaks  of 
them,  in  connexion  with  the  other  classes  of  Church 
officers.     u  Obey  your  Bishop  and  the  Presbytery  (the 
Eldership)  with  an  entire  affection ;"  Epistle  to  the 
Ephesians,  20.     "I  exhort  you  that  you  study  to  do 
all  things  in  a  divine  concord  :  your  Bis-hop  presiding 
in  the  place  of  God,  your  Elders  in  the  place  of  the 
council  of  the  Apostles,  and  your  Deacons,  most  dear  to 
me.  beinsr  intrusted  with  the  ministrv  of  Jesus  Christ." 
Again ;  "Do  nothing  without  your  Bishop  and  Elders;" 
Epistle  to  the  Magnesians,  6,  7.     u  It  is,  therefore^ 
necessary,  that,  as  ye  do,  so  without  your  Bishop  you 
should  do  nothing ;  also  be  ye  subject  to  your  Elders, 
as  to  the  Apostles  of  Jesus  Christ  our  hope."     Again  ; 
"  Let  all  reverence  the  Deacons  as  Jesus  Christ,  and 
the  Bishop  as  the  Father,  and  the  Elders  as  the  Sanhe- 
drim of  God,  and  the  college  of  the  Apostles."    Again  ; 
"  Fare  ye  well  in  Jesus  Christ ;  being  subject  to  your 
Bishop  as  to  the  command  of  God,  and  so  likewise  to 
the  Presbytery,  (or  Eldership;")  Epistle  to  the  Tral- 
Hans,  2.  3.  13.     "  Which  also  I  salute  in  the  blood  of 
Jesus  Christ,  which  is  our  eternal  and  undefiled  joy;, 
especially  if  they  are  at  unity  with  the  Bishop  and 
Elders,  who  are  with  him,  and  the  Deacons  appointed 
according  to  the  mind  of  Jesus  Christ,    Again ;  "  There 
is  one  cup,  and  one  altar,  and  also  one  Bishop,  together 


THE  FATHERS.  79 

with  his  Eldership,  and  the  Deacon?,  my  fellow- 
servants."  Again  ;  "  I  cried  whilst  I  was  among  you  ; 
I  spake  with  a  loud  voice,  Attend  to  the  Bishop,  to 
the  Eldership,  and  to  the  Deacons;"  Epistle  to  the 
Philadelphians,  Pref.  4.  7.  See  that  ye  all  follow 
your  Bishop,  as  Jesus  Christ,  the  Father,  and  the  Pres- 
bytery (or  Eldership)  as  the  Apostles  ;  and  reverence 
the  Deacons  as  the  command  of  God."  Again;  "It  is. 
not  lawful  without  the  Bishop  either  to  baptize,  or  to 
celebrate  the  holy  communion."  Again ;  "  I  salute  your 
very  worthy  Bishop;  and  your  venerable  Eldership, 
and  your  Deacons,  my  fellow-servants ;  Epistle  to  the 
Stnyrneans,  8.  12.  "My  soul  be  security  for  them 
who  submit  to  their  Bishop,  with  their  Elders  and 
Deacons;"  Epistle  to  Poly  carp,  6. 

The  friends  of  Prelacy  have  long  been  in  the  habk 
of  insisting  much  on  these  and  similar  quotations  from 
Ignatius,  as  affording  decisive  support  to  their  system, 
But  I  must  think  that  their  confidence  in  this  witness 
has  not  the  smallest  solid  ground.*  For,  let  it  be  re- 
membered that  these  several  Epistles  were  directed,  not 
to  large,  prelatical  dioceses,  but  to  single  parishes,  or 
congregations;  that  in  each  of  these  Churches  there 
are  represented  as  being,  a  Bishop,  a  Piesbytery,  or 
bench  of  Elders,  and  a  plurality  of  Deacons  ;  and, 
therefore,  that  it  is  parochial  episcopacy,  and  not  dio- 
cesan, or  prelatical,  that  is  here  described.  And,  ac- 
cordingly, we  learn  from  different  parts  of  these  Epistles, 
that,  in  the  time  of  Ignatius,  each  Bishop  had  unde* 

*  Intelligent  readers  are  no  doubt,  aware  that  the  genuine- 
ness of  the  Epistles  of  Ignatius  has  been  called  in  question  by 
a  great  majority  of  Protestant  divines,  and  is  not  only  really 
but  deeply  questionable.  All  inquiry,  however,  on  this  sub- 
ject is  waved  for  the  present. 


80  TESTIMONY  OF 

his  pastoral  charge,  but  "one  altar,"  "one  cup,"  "one 
loaf,"  i.  e.  one  communion  table,  and  that  the  people 
under  his  care  habitually  came  together  to  "one  place," 
in  other  words,  formed  "one  assembly." 

Agreeably  to  this  view  of  the  subject,  it  is  worthy  of 
notice  that  Ignatius  calls  the  Presbyters,  or  Elders  of 
each  Church  which  he  addresses,  the  awsdgiov  ©sou,  that 
is  the  Sanhedrim,  or  council  of  God.  But  with  what 
propriety  could  he  designate  them  by  this  title — the  popu- 
lar title  of  a  well  known  Jewish  ecclesiastical  court, — if 
they  did  not  constitute  a  corresponding  court  in  the 
Christian  Church;  and  if  the  whole  body  of  ecclesiastical 
officers  which  he  addressed  from  time  to  time  were  not 
the  rulers  of  a  single  flock?  The  truth  is,  the  whole 
language  of  Ignatius,  in  reference  to  the  officers  of 
whom  he  speaks^  is  strictly  Presbyterian,  and 
cannot  be  considered  as  affording  countenance  to  any 
other  system  without  doing  violence  to  its  natural  import, 

Accordingly,  it  is  worthy  of  notice,  that  the  learned 
Mr.  Joseph  Mede,  a  very  able  and  zealous  divine  of  the 
Church  of  England,  and  a  decisive  advocate  of  diocesan 
Episcopacy,  gives  a  representation  of  the  state  of  things 
in  the  time  of  Ignatius,  which,  in  substance,  falls  in 
with  our  account  of  the  character  of  the  Churches  ad- 
dressed by  that  Father.  "It  should  seem,"  says  he, 
"  that  in  those  first  times,  before  dioceses  were  divided 
into  those  lesser  and  subordinate  Churches,  which  we 
call  parishes,  and  Presbyters  assigned  to  them,  they  had 
only  one  altar  to  a  Church,  taking  Church  for  the 
company  or  corporation  of  the  faithful,  united  under  one 
Bishop  or  Pastor;  and  that  was  in  the  city  or  place 
where  the  Bishop  had  his  see  and  residence.  Unless 
this  were  so,  whence  came  it  else,  that  a  schismatical 
Bishop  was  said,  constituere,  or  collocate  aliud  al- 


THE  FATHERS.  81 

tare?  And  that  a  Bishop  and  an  Altar  are  made 
correlatives?"* 

The  same  fact  is  asserted  by  Bishop  Stillingjleet, 
in  his  Sermon  against  Separation.  "  Though,  when 
the  Churches  increased,"  says  he,  "  the  occasional  meet- 
ings were  frequent  in  several  places;  yet  still  there  was 
but  one  Church,  and  one  Altar,  and  one  Baptistery, 
and  one  Bishop,  with  many  Presbyters  attending  him. 
Which  is  so  plain  in  antiquity,  as  to  the-  Churches 
planted  by  the  Apostles  themselves,  that  none  but  a 
great  stranger  to  the  history  of  the  Church  can  call  it  in 
question.  It  is  true,  after  some  time,  in  the  great  cities, 
they  had  distinct  places  allotted,  and  Presbyters  fixed 
among  them; — and  such  allotments  were  called  Titnli 
at  Rome,  Laurai  at  Alexandria,  and  parishes  in 
other  places.  But  these  were  never  thought,  then,  to 
be  new  Churches,  or  to  have  any  independent  govern- 
ment in  themselves;  but  were  all  in  subjection  to  the 
Bishop,  and  his  college  of  Presbyters ;  of  which 
multitudes  of  examples  might  be  brought  from  the  most 
authentic  testimonies  of  antiquity,  if  a  thing  so  evident 
needed  any  proof  at  all.  And  yet  this  distribution,  (into 
distinct  Titnli,)  even  in  cities,  was  looked  on  as  so  un- 
common in  those  elder  times,  that  Epiphanius  takes 
notice  of  it  as  an  extraordinary  thing  at  Alexandria; 
and,  therefore,  it  is  probably  supposed  that  there  was  no 
such  thing  in  all  the  cities  of  Crete  in  his  time. 

That  the  Elders  spoken  of  so  frequently  by  Ignatius, 
were  all  the  officers  of  a  single  parish  or  Congregation, 
is  also  evident,  not  only  from  the  title  which  he  gives  to 
the  body  of  Elders ;  but  also  from  the  duties  which  he 
represents  as  incumbent  on  the  Bishop  with  whom 

-  - 

*  Discourse  on  Church  Government,  p.  48, 


82  TESTIMONY  OF 

these  Elders  were  connected.  It  is  represented  as  the 
duty  of  the  Bishop  to  be  present  with  his  flock  when- 
ever they  came  together;  to  conduct  their  prayers ; 
and  to  preside  in  all  their  religious  assemblies.  He  is 
spoken  of  as  the  only  person  who  was  authorized,  in 
ordinary  cases,  to  administer  Baptism,  and  the  LoroVs 
Supper;  as  the  person  by  whom  all  marriages  among 
the  people  of  his  charge  were  celebrated;  whose  duty 
it  was  to  be  personally  acquainted  with  all  his  flock; 
who  was  bound  to  take  notice,  with  his  own  eye,  of 
those  who  were  absent  from  public  worship ;  to  attend 
to  the  wants  of  the  widows  and  all  the  poor  of  his  con- 
gregation; to  seek  out  all  by  name,  and  not  to  overlook 
even  the  servant  men  and  maids  under  his  care;  to 
instruct  the  children  ;  to  reconcile  differences,  and,  in 
short,  to  attend  to  all  those  objects,  in  detail,  which  are 
considered  as  devolving  on  every  faithful  parish  minis- 
ter. Now,  all  these  representations  so  plainly  apply  to 
the  pastor  of  a  single  Church,  and  are  so  evidently 
impossible  to  be  realized  by  any  other  person,  that  it 
would  be  a  waste  of  time,  and  an  insult  to  common 
sense,  to  attempt  a  more  formal  establishment  of  the 
position. 

But  if  the  Bishop  of  Ignatius,  be  a  simple  parochial 
Bishop,  in  other  words,  the  ordinary  pastor  of  a  con- 
gregation ;  and  if  the  Presbytery,  or  bench  of  Elders 
of  which  he  so  frequently  speaks,  are  to  be  considered  as 
all  belonging  to  a  single  parish ; — then  we  can  scarcely 
avoid  the  conclusion,  that  they  were  not  all  of  them 
employed  in  public  preaching ;  but  that  their  principal 
employment  was,  as  assistants  of  the  pastor,  and  in 
union  with  him,  to  discharge  the  duties  of  Inspectors 
and  Rulers  of  the  Church. 

Again;  Polycarp,  writing  to  the  Church  of  Phi- 


THE  FATHERS.  83 

lippi,  most  evidently  and  unquivocally  conveys  the 
idea,  that  there  was  a  plurality  of  Presbyters,  (or 
Elders,)  not  only  in  his  own  Church,  but  also  in  that 
to  which  he  wrote;  and  that  they  were  the  regularly 
appointed  ecclesiastical  rulers.  He  addressed  them 
thus:  "Let  the  Elders  be  tender  and  merciful,  com- 
passionate towards  all,  reclaiming  those  which  have 
fallen  into  errors;  visiting  all  that  are  weak;  not 
negligent  of  the  widow  and  the  orphan,  and  of  him 
that  is  poor  ;  but  ever  providing  what  is  honest  in  the 
sight  of  God  and  men;  abstaining  from  all  wrath, 
respect  of  persons,  and  uprighteous judgment;  avoiding 
covetousness;  not  hastily  believing  a  report  against  any 
man;  not  rigid  in  judgment;  knowing  that  we  are  all 
faulty,  and  obnoxious  to  judgment."* 

Cyprian,  in  his  29th  Epistle,  directed  "  to  his 
brethren,  the  Elders  and  Deacons,"  expresses  himself 
in  the  following  terms : — 

"You  are  to  take  notice  that  I  have  ordained 
Satums,  a  reader,  and  the  confessor  Optatus,  a 
sub-Deacon ;  whom  we  had  all  before  agreed  to  place 
in  the  rank  and  degree  next  to  that  of  the  clergy. 
Upon  Easter  day,  we  made  one  or  two  trials  of  Saturus 
in  reading,  when  we  were  approving  our  readers 
before  the  teaching  Presbyters ;  and  then  appointed 
Optatus  from  among  the  readers,  to  be  a  teacher  of 
the  hearers."  On  this  passage,  the  Rev.  Mr.  Marshall, 
the  Episcopal  translator  and  commentator  of  Cyprian, 
remarks: — "It  is  hence,  I  think,  apparent  that  all  Pres- 
byters were  not  teachers,  but  assisted  the  Bishop  in 
other  jiarts  of  his  office."  And  Bishop  Fell,  another 
editor  and  commentator  of  Cyprian,  remarks  on  the 

*  Epistle  to  the  Philippians,  Sect.  6. 


84 


TESTIMONY  OF 


same  passage  in  the  following  words : — "  Inter  Presby- 
tero3  rectores  et  doctores  olim  distinxisse  videtur  divus 
Paulus;  1  Tim.  v.  17."  i.  e.  St.  Paul  appears  to  have 
made  a  distinction,  in  ancient  times,  between  teaching 
and  ruling  Elders,  in  1  Timothy  v.  17. — Here  two 
learned  Episcopal  divines  explicitly  acknowledge  the 
distinction  between  teaching  and  ruling  Elders  in 
the  primitive  Church;  and  one  of  them  an  eminent 
Bishop,  not  only  allows  that  Cyprian  referred  to  this 
distinction,  but  also  quotes  as  an  authority  for  it  the 
principal  text  which  Presbyterians  adduce  for  the  same 
purpose. 

There  is  another  passage  in  Cyprian's  40th  Epistle, 
which  the  very  learned  authors  of  the  Jus  Divinum 
Regiminis  Ecclesiastici*  consider  as  containing  an 
allusion  to  the  office  in  question,  and  which  may  not 
be  unworthy  of  notice.  At  the  time  when  Cyprian 
wrote  this  Letter,  he  was  in  a  state  of  exile  from  his 
Church.  It  is  directed  to  the  Elders,  Deacons,  and 
People  at  large,  of  his  congregation ;  and  contains  an 
expression  of  his  wish  that  one  Numidicus  should  be 
reckoned,  or  have  a  place  assigned  him  with  the  Pres- 
byters, or  Elders  of  that  Church,  and  sit  with  the  clergy. 
And  yet  it  would  appear  that  this  was  only  as  a  ruling, 
and  not  as  a  teaching  Elder  that  he  was  to  be  received 
by  them;  for  Cyprian  subjoins: — He  shall  be  pro- 
moted, if  God  permit,  to  a  more  distinguished  place 
in  his  religion,  (or  his  religious  function,)  when,  by  the 
protection  of  Providence,  I  shall  return."  Here,  it  seems, 
the  Presbytery,  or  Eldership  in  that  Church  were  di- 
rected immediately  to  receive,  or  set  apart,  this  man  to 
the  office  of  Elder  among  them ;  and  their  absent  pastor, 

■     i  ■  —  ■  -  -   —  —  -     — -  a  -  

*  Jus  Divinum,  &c.  p.  171, 172. 


THE  FATHERS.  85 

or  Bishop,  promises  that,  when  he  returns,  Numidicus 
shall  be  promoted  to  a  still  higher  office.  Now  the 
only  supposable  promotion  in  this  case  was  to  the  office 
of  a  Teaching  Elder.  That  the  passage  is  very 
naturally  susceptible  of  this  construction,  none  will  deny. 
At  any  rate,  it  is  adopted  by  some  of  the  most  mature 
divines  and  scholars  in  England,  of  the  seventeenth 
century;  however  unceremoniously  it  may  have  been 
since  rejected  by  less  competent  judges. 

Accordingly,  it  is  worthy  of  notice,  that  the  famous 
Henry  Dodwell,  one  of  the  most  learned  and  zealous 
Episcopal  writers  in  the  British  empire,  of  the  seven- 
teenth century,  notwithstanding  his  determined  oppo- 
sition to  every  thing  peculiarly  Presbyterian ;  yet,  in 
his  celebrated  Dissertations  on  Cyprian,  freely  grants, 
that,  in  the  days  of  that  Father  there  were  Elders 
or  Presbyters  in  the  Christian  Church  who  did  not 
preach.  He  represents  this  fact  as  undoubtedly  taught 
by  Cyprian,  in  his  Epistles,  and  particularly  refers,  for 
proof,  to  the  first  of  the  passages  cited  in  a  preceding 
page.  Nay,  he  expresses  a  full  persuasion  that  a  simi- 
lar fact  existed  in  the  apostolic  Church,  and  quotes 
1  Timothy  v.  17,  as  a  decisive  confirmation  of  his  opi- 
nion.* The  notion,  then,  that  all  testimony  supposed 
to  be  derived  from  Cyprian  in  favor  of  non-preaching1 
Elders,  is  a  dream  of  modern  sectaries,  for  the  purpose 
of  carrying  a  favorite  point  in  Church  government,  is 
plainly  not  tenable.  Some  of  the  best  talents  and  most 
mature  learning  in  the  Christian  Church,  without  any 
leaning  to  Presbyterian  opinions,  have  decisively  in- 
terpreted that  Father,  as  setting  forth  such  a  class  of 
Elders. 


*  Disscrlationes  Cyprianiccey  vi.  Sect.  4,  6,  6. 

H 


86  TESTIMONY  OF 

Hippolytus,  who  was  nearly  contemporary  with 
Cyprian j  repeatedly  speaks  of  these  Elders  as  existing, 
and  as  exercising  authority  in  his  day.     In  his  Tract 
"Against  the  heresy  of  a  certain  Noetus"  he  states,  in 
the  beginning  of  the  work,  that  Noetus  being  charged 
with  certain  heretical  opinions,  the  "Elders  (ngstiQwregoi) 
cited  him  to  appear,  and  examined  him  in  the  presence 
of  the  Church  j"  that  Noetus  having  at  first  denied, 
but  afterwards  openly  avowed  the  opinions  imputed  to 
him, — "  the  Elders  summoned  him  a  second  time,  con- 
demned him,  and  cast  him  out  of  the  Church."     It 
seems,  then,  that  in  the  third  century  there  were  Elders, 
whose  duty  it  was  to  examine,  try,  and  excommunicate 
such  members  of  the  Church  as  were  found  delinquent 
with  respect  to  either  doctrine  or  morals.    In  this  case,  a 
part,  at  least,  of  the  trial,  seems  to  have  been  conducted 
"  in  the  presence  of  the  Church,"  of  which  they  were 
rulers ;  but  still  the  trial,  conviction  and  excommuni- 
cation were*  by  the  Eders. 

Origen,  who,,  it  is  well  known,  flourished  a  little 
more  than  two  hundred  years  after  Christ,  in  the  follow- 
ing passage,  has  a  plain  reference  to  the  class  of  officers 
under  consideration.  "  There  are  some  Riders  ap- 
pointed whose  duty  it  is  to  inquire  concerning  the  man- 
ners and  conversation  of  those  who  are  admitted,  that 
they  may  debar  from  the  congregation  such  as  commit 
filthiness."*  This  passage  is  replete  with  important  and 
conclusive  testimony.  It  not  only  proves,  that,  in  the 
time  of  Origen,  there  were  Rulers  in  the  Christian 
Church;  but  that  the  chief  and  peculiar  business  of 
these  Rulers  was  precisely  that  which  we  assign  to 
Ruling  Elders,  viz.:  inspecting  the  members  of  the 

*  Contra  Celsum.    Lib.  iii.  p.  142.    Edit.  Cantab.  1677. 


THE  FATHERS.  ^-7 

Church;  watching  over  all  its  spiritual  interests;  ad- 
mitting to  its  communion  those  who,  on  inquiry,  were 
found  worthy;  and  debarring  those  who  were  in  any 
way  immoral.  It  is  perfectly  evident  from  this  pas- 
sage alone,  that,  in  the  days  of  this  learned  Father,  the 
government  and  discipline  of  the  Church  were  not  con- 
ducted by  the  body  of  the  communicants  at  large,  but 
by  a  bench  op  rulers. 

The  same  important  fact  is  also  indubitably  implied 
in  the  language  of  Origen  in  another  place.     In  his 
seventh  Homily  on  Joshua,  he  speaks  of  one  who, 
li  having  been  thrice  admonished,  and  being  unwilling 
to  repent,  was  cut  off  from  the  Church  by  its  riders? 
Those  who  cut  off  then,  from  the  communion  of  the 
Church,  and  restored  the  penitent,  in  the  time  of  Ori- 
gen, were  not  the  body  of  the  communicants,  but  a 
bench  of  Elders.    This  great  historical  fact  is,  more- 
over, explicitly  established,  as  having  existed  in  the 
third  century,  (the  age  of  Origen,)  by  the  Magde- 
burgh  Centuriators,  a  body  of  very  learned  Lutheran 
Divines,  contemporary  with  Melancthon,  and  whose 
authority  as  ecclesiastical  historians,  is  deservedly  high. 
"  The  right,"  say  they,  "of  deciding  respecting  such  as 
were  to  be  excommunicated,  or  of  receiving,  upon  their 
repentance,  such  as  had  fallen,  was  vested  in  the  El- 
ders of  the  Church* 

In  the  Gesta  Purgationis  Cceciliani  et  Felicis, 
preserved  at  the  end  of  Optatus,  and  commonly  re- 
ferred to  the  beginning  of  the  fourth  century,  we  meet 
with  the  following  enumeration  of  Church  officers: 
LiPresbyteri,  Diaconi  et  Seniores"  i.  e.  " The  Pres- 
byters, the  Deacons  and  the  Elders?     And  a  little 


*  Cent.  \\\.  Cap.  vii.  p.  151. 


88  TESTIMONY  OF" 

after  is  added : — "Adhibite  conclericos,  et  Seniores 
plebis,  ecclesiasticos  viros,  et  inquirant  diligenter 
quce  sint  istcB  dissentiones,"  i.  e.  "Call  the  fellow 
clergymen  and  Elders-  of  the  people^  ecclesiastical  men, 
and  let  them  inquire  diligently  what  are  these  dissen- 
tions."  In  that  assembly,  likewise,  several  letters  were 
produced  and. read ;  one  addressed,  Clero  et  Senior  ibus, 
i.e.  "to  the  clergy  and  the  Elders;"  and  another, 
Clericis  et  Senior  ibus,  h  e.  "to  the  Clergymen  and  the 
Elders."  Here,  then,  is  a  class  of  men  expressly  re- 
cognized as  ecclesiastical  menr  or  Church  officers; 
who  are  styled  Elders;  who  were  constituent  mem- 
bers of  a  solemn  ecclesiastical  assembly,  or  judicatory; 
who  are  expressly  charged  with  inquiring  into  matters 
connected  with  the  discipline  of  the  Church;  and  yet 
carefully  distinguished  from  the  Clergy,  with  svhom 
they  met,  and  officially  united  in  the  transaction  of 
business.  If  these  be  not  the  Elders  of  whom  we  are 
in  search,  we  may  give  up  all  the  rules  of  evidence. 

Some,  indeed,  have  said,  that  the  phrase  ecclesias- 
ticos viros,  in  one  of  the  passages  last  cited,  was  not 
intended  to  designate  Church  officers  at  all;  that  this 
phrase  was  early  introduced  to  distinguish  ume?i  of 
the  Church,"  i.  er  Christians  from  Pagans,  and  other 
enemies  of  Christ:  and  that  it  probably  had  some  such 
meaning,  and  nothing  more,  in  the  ancient  records 
from  which  the  foregoing  extracts  are  made.  It  is 
freely  granted  that  the  phrase,  ecclesiastici  viri,  was, 
for  a  time  employed,  in  the  Christian  Church,  as  well 
as  by  the  surrounding  heathen,  in  the  sense,  and  for 
the  purpose  just  mentioned.  That  is,  when  Christians 
were  spoken  of,  as  distinguished  from  Jews,  Infidels,. 
Heretics,  &c,  they  were  called  ecclesiastical  men,  im- 
porting, that  they  did  not  belong  to  Jewish. Synagogues^ 


THE    FATHERS.  89 

or  to  Heathen  Temples,  or  to  Heretical  sects ;  but  were 
adherents,  or  members  of  the  Church  of  Christ.  But 
it  is  well  known,  that  this  language  wras  never  em- 
ployed in  this  sense  among  Christians  themselves,  when 
distinguishing  one  class  of  their  own  body  from  another. 
When  used  in  this  case,  it  always  designated  men  in 
ecclesiastical  office*  Besides,  in  the  passage  before 
us,  there  can  be  no  doubt  that  the  phrase  under  con- 
sideration was  used  in  the  latter  sense,  and  not  in  the 
former.  For  the  ecclesiastical  men,  in  these  passages 
are  represented  as  joined  with  the  clergy  in  eccles-ias- 
tical  functions;  especially  as  directed  to  investigate 
and  settle  ecclesiastical  dissentions.  Surely  this  could 
neither  be  required  nor  expected  of  men  who  sustained 
no  office,  and  were,  of  course,  invested  with  no  authority 
in  the  Church. 

Another  objection  which  has  been  confidently  urged 
against  that  construction  which  we  have  put  upon  the 
extracts  from  the  Gesta  Purgatio?iis,  &c.,  is  that  the 
^Seniors  or  Elders,  of  which  they  speak,  are  mentioned 
after  Deacons,  and,  therefore,  are  to  be  considered 
as  inferior  to  them.  "  Now,"  says  these  objectors,  "  the 
Riding  Elders  of  the  Presbyterian  Church  are  always 
considered  and  represented,  by  the  advocates  of  that 
denomination,  as  above  Deacons,  rather  than  below 
them,  on  the  scale  of  ecclesiastical  precedence.  Of 
course,  the  Senior  here  spoken  of,  cannot  belong  to 
the  class  of  officers  for  which  they  contend."  To  this 
objection  it  is  sufficient  to  reply,  that  the  mere  order  in 
which  titles  are  arranged,  cannot  be  considered  as  de- 
cisive of  the  relative  rank  with  which  these  titles  are 

♦  Bingham's    Origines    Ecclesiastical,   Book  i.   chapter  1. 
section  8. 

h2 


90 


TESTIMONY    OF' 


connected.  At  once  to  illustrate  and  confirm  this  re- 
mark, a  single  example  will  suffice.  In  the  Epistles  of 
Ignatius,  when  he  speaks  of  Bishops,  or  Pastors? 
Elders  and  Deacons,  no  intelligent  reader  supposes 
that  he  means  to  represent  the  second  and  third  of 
these  classes  of  offices  as  inferior  to  the  first.  Yet,  in 
his  Epistle  to  the  Trallians,  he  speaks  thus: — "Let  all 
reverence  the  Deacons  as  Jesus  Christ;  and  the  Bishop 
as  the  Father;  and  the  Presbyters  as  the  Sanhedrim 
of  God,  and  the  college  of  the  Apostles."  This  may 
argue  carelessness  or  haste  in  writing;  or  it  may  argue 
a  mind  in  the  writer,  less  intent  on  ecclesiastical  prece- 
dence, than  on  more  important  matters;  but  it  surely 
cannot  be  considered  as  deciding  the  relative  standing 
of  the  different  officers  of  whom  he  speaks. 

Besides,  let  it  be  recollected,  that  the  date  of  these 
Gesta  was  about  the  year  of  Christ,  303,  when  the 
office  of  Ruling-  Elder,  if  we  may  credit  the  very  ex- 
plicit testimony  of  Ambrose,  which  will  be  stated  pre- 
sently, was  going  gradually  out  of  use.  If  so,  nothing 
was  more  natural  than  that,  the  writers  and  speakers  of 
that  day  should  be  disposed  to  throw  it  on  the  back 
ground,  and  rather  degrade  than  advance  its  appro- 
priate rank  in  the  scale  of  ecclesiastical  honor. 

There  is  also  a  passage  in  Optatus,  of  the  African 
Church,  who  flourished  a  little  after  the  middle  of  the 
fourth  century,  which  corroborates  the  foregoing  quota- 
tions. It  is  as  follows: — "The  Church  had  many 
ornaments  of  gold  and  silver,  which  she  could  neither 
bury  in  the  earth,  nor  carry  away  with  her,  which  she 
committed  to  the  Elders,  (Senior  ibns,)  as  to  faithful 
persons."*     There  can  scarcely  be  a  doubt  that  these 

*  Optat,  Lib.  i.  p.  41.  edit.  Paris,  163K 


THE  FATHERS*  91 

were  not  mere  aged  persons,  but  official  men ;  and, 
especially,  as  we  know,  from  the  writings  of  Cyprian,. 
who  resided  in  the  same  country,  that  there  were  such 
officers  in  the  African  Church,,  a  few  years  before. 

Ambrose,  who  lived  in  the  fourth  century,*  in  his  com- 
mentary on  1  Timothy  v.  i,  has  the  following  passage : 
"For,  indeed,  among  all  nations  old  age  is  honorable. 
Hence  it  is  that  the  Synagogue,  and  afterwards  the 
Church,  had  Elders,  without  whose  counsel  nothing 
was  done  in  the  Church ;  which  by  what  negligence 
it  grew  into  disuse  I  know  not,  unless,  perhaps,  by  the 
sloth,  or  rather  by  the  pride  of  the  Teachers,  while 
they  alone  wished  to  appear  something."     The  great 
body  of  the  Prelatists,  as  well  as  some  others,  have 
labored  hard  to  divest  this  passage  of  its  plain  and 
pointed  testimony  in  favor  of  the  office  of  Ruling  Elder.. 
They  insist  upon  it  that  the  pious  Father  had  no  refer- 
ence whatever  to  ecclesiastical   officers,  but  only  to 
aged  persons,  and  that  he  meant  to  say  nothing  more 
than  that,  formerly,  in  the  Syjiagoguc,  and  afterwards 
in  the  Church,  there  were  old  men,  whom  it  was  cus- 
tomary to  consult;  which  practice,  however,  at  the  time 
in  which   he  wrote,  was  generally  laid  aside.     This 
perversion  of  an  obvious  meaning,  is  really  so  strange 
and  extravagant,  that  the  formality  of  a  serious  refuta- 
tion seems  scarcely  necessary.     Can  any  reflecting  man 
believe  that  Hilary  designed  only  to  inform  his  readers 
that  in  the  Jewish  Synagogues,  there  were  actually 
persons  who  had  attained  a  considerable  age;  that  this 

*  It  is  not  forgotten  that  learned  men  have  generally  consi- 
dered the  real  name  of  this  writer  as  Hilary.  Yet  as  the 
name  of  Ambrose  is  more  frequently  given  to  him,  especially 
by  many  writers  hereafter  to  be  quoted,  the  latter  name  will 
be  more  intelligible,  and,  therefore,  more  convenient. 


92  TESTIMONY  OF 

was  also,  afterwards  the  case  in  the  Christian  Church ; 
and  that  these  aged  persons  were  generally  consulted? 
This  would  have  been  a  sage  remark  indeed !  Was  there 
ever  a  community  of  any  extent,  either  ecclesiastical  or 
civil;  which  did  not  include  some  aged  persons?  Or 
was  there  ever  a  state  of  society,  or  an  age  of  the  world, 
in  which  the  practice  of  consulting  the  aged  and  ex- 
perienced had  fallen  into  disuse?  That  thinking, 
candid  minds,  should  be  able  to  satisfy  themselves  with 
such  a  gloss,  is  truly  wonderful.  It  is  certainly  no 
argument  in  favor  of  this  construction  of  the  language 
of  Ambrose,  that  he  prefaces  his  statement  respecting 
the  Synagogue  and  the  Church,  by  remarking,  that 
"among  all  nations  old  age  is  honorable."  Surely  no 
remark  could  be  more  natural  or  appropriate,  when  he 
was  about  to  state,  that  from  the  earliest  period  of  the 
Christian  Church,  and  long  before  in  the  Synagogue,  all 
their  affairs  had  been  managed  by  colleges  of  Elders, 
(a  title  importing  a  kind  of  homage  to  age  and  experi- 
ence^) without  whose  council  nothing  was  done. 

But  there  is  a  clause  in  this  extract  from  Ambrose, 
which  precludes  all  doubt  that  he  intended  to  allude 
to  a  class  of  Church  officers,  and  not  merely  to  old 
age.  It  is  this: — "Which  by  what  negligence  it  grew 
into  disuse,  I  know  not,  unless,  perhaps,  by  the  sloth, 
or  rather  by  the  pride  of  the  Teachers,  who  wished 
alone  to  appear  something."  It  is  very  conceivable 
and  obvious  that  both  the  pride  and  the  sloth  of  the 
Teachers,  or  Teaching  Elders,  should  render  them 
willing  to  get  rid  of  a  bench  of  officers  of  equal  power 
with  themselves,  as  Rulers  in  the  Church,  and,  con- 
sequently, able  to  control  their  wishes  in  cases  of  dis 
cipline.  But  it  cannot  easily  be  conceived  why  either 
sloth  or  pride  should  render  any  so  particularly  averse 


THE  FATHERS.  93 

to  all  consultation  with  the  aged  and  experienced,  in> 
preference  to  the  young,  on  the  affairs  of  the  Church ; 
especially  if  these  aged  persons  bore  no  office,  and  there 
was,  of  course,  no  official  obligation  to  be  governed  by 
their  advice,  as  the  gloss  under  consideration  supposes. 
It  being  evident,  then,  that  a  class  of  officers  was  here 
intended,  the  question  arises,  what  class  of  Presbyters, 
or  Elders,  was  that  which  had  grown  into  disuse  in 
the  fourth  century  ?  Not  teaching  Presbyters,  surely; 
for  every  one  knows  that  that  class  of  Presbyters  had 
not  become  obsolete  in  Ambrose's  time.  His  own 
writings  amply  attest  the  reverse.  And  every  one  aIso« 
knows  that  this  class  of  Church  officers  has  never  been 
laid  aside,  or  even  diminished  in  number,  to  the  present 
day. 

Tt  is  worthy  of  very  particular  notice  here,  also,  as 
no  small  confirmation  of  the  construction  which  we 
put  upon  the  words  of  Ambrose,  that  all  the  most 
learned   and   able  of  the   Reformers,   and  a   great 
number  of  others,  the  most  competent  judges  in  such 
matters,  from  the  Reformation  to  the  present   lime, 
have  concurred  in   adopting  the   same   construction,, 
and  have  considered  the  worthy  Father  as  referring 
to  a  class  of  Elders  who  held  the  place  of  inspectors 
and    rulers   in   the   Church.      Learned   Lutherans, 
and   Episcopalians,  as   well  as   Calv'mists,   almost 
without   number,   have   united   in   the  interpretation 
of  this  Father,  which  we  have  given,  with  a  degree 
of  harmony  truly  wonderful,  if  that  interpretation  be 
entirely  erroneous.     Is  it  less  likely  that  Luther,  and 
Melancthon,  and   Bucer,  and   Whilgift,  and  Zan- 
chius,  and  Peter  Martyr,  who  had  no  sectarian  or  pri- 
vate views  to  serve,  should  be  able  correctly  to  read  and; 
understand  Ambrose,  than  that  modern  and  more 


94  TESTIMONY  OP 

superficial  scholars  should  be  betrayed  into  a  mistaken 
construction,  on  the  side  in  favor  of  which  their  feelings 
were  strongly  enlisted?  No  disrespect  whatever  is 
intended  to  the  latter;  but  it  cannot  be  doubted  that  a 
great  preponderancy  of  testimony,  both  as  to  numbers 
and  competency,  is  on  the  side  of  the  former. 

Augustine,  Bishop  of  Hippo ,  who  also  lived  toward 
the  close  of  the  fourth  century,  often  refers  to  this  class 
of  officers  in  his  writings.  Thus,  in  his  work,  Contra 
Cresconium  Grammaticum,  Lib.  hi.  Cap.  56,  he 
speaks  of  "  Peregrinus,  Presbyter,  et  Seniores  Ec~ 
clesiai  Musticanmregionis?  i.  e.  "Peregrine, the  Pres- 
byter, and  the  Elders  of  the  Church  of  the  Mustacan 
district."  And  again,  he  addresses  one  of  his  Epistles 
intended  for  his  Church  at  Hippo,  in  the  following 
manner: — " Dilectissimis  Fratribus,  Clero,  Seniori- 
ties et  universcB  Plebi  EcclesiceHipponensisf  Epist. 
137;  i.  e.  "To  the  beloved  brethren,  the  Clergy,  the 
Elders,  and  all  the  people  of  the  Church  at  Hippo." 
There  were  some  Elders,  then,  in  the  time  of  Augus- 
tine, whom  he  distinguishes  from  other  Presbyters,  and 
whom  he  also  distinguishes  from  the  Clergy.  And, 
lest  any  should  suppose  that  the  Elders  here  spoken  of 
were  not  officers,  but  mere  private  members  of  the 
Church,  he  distinguishes  them  from  the  jilebs  universa 
of  the  Church.  Augustine,  also,  in  another  place, 
{De  Verb.  Horn.  Serm.  19,)  speaks  thus: — '-'•Cum 
ob  err  or  em  aliquem  a  Senioribus  arguuntur,  et 
imputatur  alicui  de  illis,  cur  ebrius  fueritl  cur 
res  alienas  pervaseritV  &c,  i.  e.  "When  they  are 
reprehended  for  any  error  by  the  Elders,  and  are 
upbraided  with  having  been  drunk,  or  with  having 
been  guilty  of  theft,  &c."  Can  any  one  doubt  that 
Augustine  is  here  speaking,  not  of  mere  aged  persons. 


THE  FATHERS.  95 

but  of  Church  officers,  whose  duty  it  was  to  inspect 
the  morals  of  the  members  of  the  Church,  and  to 
"upbraid,"  or  reprove  those  who  had  been  reprehensi- 
ble in  their  deportment?     It  would  be  easy  to  produce, 
from  the  same  Father,  a  number  of  other  quotations 
equally  to  our  purpose.  But  Bingham,  in  his  Origines 
Ecclesiastical,   Bishop  Taylor,   in   his   Episcopacy 
Asserted,  and  other  learned  Prelatists,  have  rendered 
this  unnecessary,  by  making  an  explicit  acknowledg- 
ment, that  Augustine  repeatedly  mentions  these  Se- 
niors or  Elders,  as  belonging  to  other  Churches  as  well 
as  his  own,  in  his  time;  and  that  the  same  kind  of 
Elders  are  frequently  referred  to  by  other  writers,  both 
before  and  after  Augustine,  as  then  existing  in  the 
Church ;  as  holding  in  it  some  kind  of  official  station ; 
and  yet  as  distinguished  from  clergymen.     It  is  true, 
indeed,  that  Bingham  insists  upon  it  that  these  were 
not  Ruling  Elders,  in   our   sense   of  the  word ;  but 
that  they  held  some  kind  of  office  in  the  Church,  and 
yet  were  not  public  preachers,  he  explicitly  grants. 
We  ask  nothing  more.     This  is  quite  sufficient  for  our 
purpose. 

The  ancient  work,  entitled  Apostolical  Constitu- 
tions, although  by  no  means  of  Apostolical  origin, 
was  probably  composed  sometime  between  the  second 
and  fifth  centuries.  The  following  significant  and 
pointed  rule,  extracted  from  that  work,  will  be  consi- 
dered by  the  intelligent  reader  as  by  no  means  equivo- 
cal in  its  aspect: — "To  Presbyters  also,  when  they 
labor  assiduously  in  the  word  and  doctrine,  let  a  double 
portion  be  assigned."*  Here  is,  obviously,  a  distinction 
between  Presbyters  who  are  employed  in  teaching,  and 

*  Apostol  Constit.  Lib.  ii.  Cap.  28. 


9f  TESTIMONY  OF 

those  who  are  not  so  employed.  To  what  duties  the 
others  devoted  themselves  is  not  stated;  but  it  is  evident 
that  teaching  made  no  part  of  their  ordinary  occupation. 
We  may  take  for  granted  that  their  duty  was  to  assist 
in  the  other  spiritual  concerns  of  the  Church,  viz.:  in 
maintaining  good  order  and  discipline.  This  is  pre- 
cisely the  distinction  which  Presbyterians  make,  and 
which  they  believe  to  have  been  made  in  the  primitive 
Church.  Accordingly  the  Presbyters,  in  the  same  relic 
of  Christian  antiquity,  and  in  a  subsequent  part  of 
the  same  chapter,  are  called  "the  Counsellors  of  the 
Bishop,  or  Pastor;  and  the  Sanhedrim,  or  Senate  of  the 
Church :"  expressions  which  entirely  harmonize  with 
our  views  of  the  office  of  Elder  in  the  ancient  Church. 

To  the  same  class  of  officers,  lsodore  of  Hispala, 
who  flourished  in  the  sixth  century,  seems  to  allude, 
when,  in  arivinsf  directions  as  to  the  manner  in  which 
pastors  should  conduct  their  official  instructions,  he 
says: — Prius  docendi  su?it  Seniores  plebis,  ut  per 
eos  infra  positi  facilius  doceantur ;"  i.  e.  "  The  El- 
ders of  the  people  are  first  to  be  taught,  that  by  them 
such  as  are  placed  under  them,  may  be  more  easily 
instructed."  Here  again,  these  Seniores  are  evidently 
spoken  of  as  Church  officers,  who  were  set  over  the 
people,  and  yet  occupied  a  station  inferior  to  that  of  the 
pastors,  or  public  preachers. 

Nor  does  this  class  of  officers  appear  to  have  entirely 
ceased  in  the  Church  at  as  late  a  period  as  that  of 
Gregory  the  great,  who  wrote  in  the  latter  part 
of  the  sixth  century.  In  one  of  his  Epistles  he  gives 
the  following  direction: — "If  any  thing  should  come  to 
your  ears  concerning  any  clergyman,  which  may  be 
justly  considered  as  matter  of  offence,  do  not  easily  be- 
lieve it;  but  let  truth  be  diligently  investigated  by  the 


THE  FATHERS.  97 

JBlders  of  the  Church,  who  may  be  at  hand,  and  then, 
if  the  character  of  the  act  demand  it,  let  the  proper 
punishment  fall  on  the  offender."* 

Here  there  is  evidently  a  very  distinct  reference  to 
such  a  class  of  officers  as  that  of  which  we  are  speaking. 
They  are  distinguished  from  clergymen;  and  yet  they 
are  represented  as  ecclesiastical  officers,  to  whom  it 
properly  pertained  to  investigate  ecclesiastical  offences; 
and  to  give  advice  and  direction  in  peculiarly  delicate 
cases  of  discipline.  At  an  earlier  period  of  the  Church, 
indeed,  these  Elders,  as  well  as  all  other  classes  of 
ecclesiastical  men,  were  styled  clergymen;  as  we  shall 
have  occasion  more  fully  to  show  hereafter:  but  from 
the  fourth  century  and  onward,  Elders  of  this  class 
declined  in  numbers  and  in  popularity,  and  not  long 
afterwards  were  in  a  great  measure  laid  aside,  excepting 
by  the  humble  and  devoted  Witnesses  of  the  Truth,  of 
whose  testimony  we  shall  speak  in  the  next  chapter. 

There  is  another  species  of  evidence  here  worthy  of 
notice.  The  representation  which  the  fathers  give  of 
the  manner  in  which  the  Bishop  or  Pastor  and  his 
Elders  were  commonly  seated,  when  the  Church  was 
assembled,  and  during  the  solemnities  of  public  worship, 
afford  very  strong  evidence  that  the  mass  of  the  Elders 
were  such  as  it  is  the  object  of  this  Essay  to  establish. 
We  are  told  by  several  of  the  early  Fathers,  that  when 
the  Church  was  convened  for  public  worship,  the  Bishop, 
or  Pastor,  was  commonly  seated  on  the  middle  of  a 
raised  bench,  or  long  semi-circular  seat,  at  one  end  of 
the  Church;  that  his  Elders  were  seated  on  each 
side  of  him,  on  the  same  seat,  or  on  seats  immediately 

4 

*  Epistolce,  Lib  ii.  Epist.  19 — quoted  from  ttte  Politica 
Ecclesiastica  of  Voetius,  Par.  ii.  Lib.  ii.  Tract,  in 

I 


98  TESTIMONY  OP 

adjoining,  and  commonly  a  little  lower;  and  that  the 
Deacons  commonly  stood  in  front  of  this  bench,  ready 
to  give  any  notice,  to  execute  any  order,  or  to  perform 
any  service  which  the  Pastor  or  Elders  might  think 
proper  to  direct.  This  practice  was  evidently  drawn 
from  the  Jewish  Synagogue.  And,  indeed,  the  order 
of  assembling,  sitting,  and  worship  in  the  Christian 
assemblies,  for  the  first  two  or  three  centuries,  so 
strikingly  resembled  that  of  the  Synagogue,  that 
Christian  Churches  were  frequently  contemned,  and 
opposed  as  "Synagogues  in  disguise?* 

This  general  fact  is  so  well  attested  by  the  early 
Christian  writers,  that  it  is  unnecessary  to  detain  the 
reader  by  any  formal  proof  of  it.  Now,  if  in  every 
Church,  when  assembled  in  ordinary  circumstances, 
there  were  present  a  Pastor,  Overseer,  or  Bishop,  and  a 
body  of  Elders,  sitting  with  him,  and  counselling  and 
aiding  him  in  the  inspection  and  discipline  of  the 
Church ;  it  is  hardly  necessary  to  say,  that  these  Elders 
could  not  all  have  been  such  Presbyters  as  the  friends 
of  Prelacy  contend  for,  as  their  "second  order  of  clergy." 
The  supposition  is  absurd.  They  could  only  have  been 
such  a  bench  of  pious  and  venerable  men,  as  were  chiefly 
employed  in  overseeing  and  ruling;  and  corresponding, 
substantially,  with  the  Elders  of  the  Presbyterian 
Church.  It  is  true,  indeed,  the  advocates  of  Prelacy 
endeavor  to  persuade  us  that  these  Presbyters  were  the 
stated  preachers  in  the  several  congregations  or  wor- 
shipping assemblies  which  were,  as  they  suppose,  com- 
prehended in  the  Bishop's  charge,  But  this  supposition 
is  wholly  unsupported.  Nay,  it  is  directy  contrary  to 
the  whole  current  of  early  testimony  on  this  subject. 


f  Thorndike's  Discourse  on  Religious  Assemblies,  p.  57. 


THE  FATHERS.  99 

The  very  same  writers  who  inform  us  that  there  were 
any  Presbyters  at  all  in  the  Christian  Church  within 
the  first  three  hundred  years,  represent  a  plurality 
of  them  as  sitting  with  the  Bishop  or  Pastor,  and  pre- 
sent IN  EVERY  WORSHIPPING   ASSEMBLY.      There 

is  no  system  with  which  this  statement  can  be  made 
essentially  to  agree,  but  that  which  is  received  among 
Presbyterians. 

Another  strong  argument  in  support  of  the  doctrine 
of  Ruling  Elders,  as  drawn  from  the  early  Fathers,  is 
found  in  the  abundant  evidence  which  their  writings 
furnish,  that,  during  the  first  three  ox  four  centuries 
after  Christ,  the  great  body  of  the  Christian  Presbyters 
did  not  ordinarily  preach,  indeed,  never  but  by  the 
special  permission  of  the  Bishop  or  Pastor.  The  fol- 
lowing statement  by  the  learned  Bingham,  in  his 
Urigincs  Ecclesiastical,  Book  ii.  chapter  iii.  section  4. 
will  be  found  conclusive  on  this  point : 

"The  like  observation  may  be  made  upon  the  office 
of  preaching.  This  was  in  the  first  place  the  Bishop's 
office,  which  they  commonly  discharged  themselves, 
especially  in  the  African  Churches.  Which  is  the 
reason  we  so  frequently  meet  with  the  phrase,  Trac- 
tante  Episcopo,  the  Bishop  preaching,  in  the  writings 
of  Cyprian.  For  then  it  was  so  much  the  office  and 
custom  of  Bishops  to  preach,  that  no  Presbyter  was 
permitted  to  preach  in  their  presence,  till  the  time  of 
St.  Austin,  who,  whilst  he  was  a  Presbyter  was  author- 
ized by  Valerius,  his  Bishop,  to  preach  before  him. 
But  that,  as  Possidius,  the  writer  of  his  life  observes, 
was  so  contrary  to  the  use  and  custom  of  the  African 
Churches,  that  many  Bishops  were  highly  offended  at 
it,  and  spoke  against  it ;  till  the  consequences  proved 
that  such  a  permission  was  of  good  use  and  service  to 


100  TESTIMONY  OF 

the  Church ;  and  then  several  other  Bishops  granted 
their  Presbyters  power  and  privilege  to  preach  before 
them.     So  that  it  was  then  a  favor  for  the  Presbyters 
to  preach  in  the  presence  of  the  Bishops,  and  wholly  at 
the  Bishop's  discretion,  whether   they   would  permit 
them  or  not;  and  when  they  did  preach,  it  was  wholly 
potestate  accept®,  by  the  power  and  authority  of  the 
Bishops  that  appointed  them.  In  the  Eastern  Churches 
Presbyters  were  more  commonly  employed  to  preach, 
as  Possidius  observes,  when  he  says  Valerius  brought 
the  custom  into  Africa  from  their  example.     And  St. 
Jerome  intimates  as  much,  when  he  complains  of  it  as 
an  ill  custom  only  in  some  Churches  to  forbid  Presby- 
ters to  preach.     Chrysoslom  preached  several  of  his 
elaborate  discourses  at  Antioch,  while  he  was  but  a 
Presbyter;  and  so  did  Atticus  at  Constantinople:  and 
the  same  is  observed  to  have  been  granted  to  the  Pres- 
byters of  Alexandria  and  Casarea,  in  Cappadocioj, 
and  Cyprus,  and  other  places.     But  still  it  was  but  a 
grant  of  the  Bishops;  and  Presbyters  did  it  by  their 
authority  and  commission.     And  whenever  Bishops  saw 
just  reason  to  forbid  them,  they  had  power  to  limit  or 
withdraw  their  commission  again: — as  both  Socrates 
and  Sozomen  testify,  who  say  that  at  Alexandria  Pres- 
byters were  forbidden  to  preach  from  the  time  that  Arius 
raised  a  disturbance  in  the  Church.     Thus  we  see  what, 
a  power  Bishops  anciently  challenged  and  exercised 
over  Presbyters  in  the  common  and  ordinary  offices  of 
the  Church:  particularly  for  preaching,  Bishops  always 
esteemed  it  their  office  as  much  as  any  other." 
This  statement  is  amply  illustrated  and  confirmed  by 
the  learned  author  by  numerous  references  to  early 
writers  of  the  highest  reputation,  wrhich  it  is  altogether 


THE   FATHERS.  101 

unnecessary  to  recite,  on  account  of  the  notoriety  of  trie 
fact  alleged. 

Can  such  a  statement  be  contemplated  a  moment 
without  perceiving,  that  the  mas3  of  the  Presbyters  or 
Elders,  during  the  times  here  spoken  of,  were  a  very 
different  class  of  officers  from  those  commonly  styled 
"Presbyters,"  in  the  Papacy  afterwards,  and  in  more 
moderti  Prelatical  Churches?  The  very  circumstance 
of  preaching  making  no  part  of  their  ordinary  func- 
tion; nay,  that,  in  ordinary  cases,  they  were  never 
allowed  to  do  it,  but  in  virtue  of  a  special  permission, 
which  is  evidently  the  import  of  the  whole  account, 
unless  we  make  nonsense  of  it;  places  it  beyond  all 
doubt  that  the  authority  which  they  received  at  ordina 
tion,  did  not  really  commission  them  to  preach  at  all; 
but  that  the  Bishop  only  was  the  commissioned  preacher. 
This  is  exactly  what  Presbyterians  say. — And  if  ever 
Ruling  Elders  or  Deacons  among  us,  conduct  social 
worship,  and  address  the  people  in  public,  it  is  always 
under  the  direction  of  the  Bishop  or  Pastor,  who  may 
encourage  or  arrest  it  as  he  pleases.  It  is  vain  to  say, 
that  Presbyters  in  the  Protestant  Episcopal  Church  at 
the  present  day  cannot  preach,  or  perform  any  ecclesi- 
astical act  without  the  Bishop's  permission.  This  is  an 
idle  evasion.  The  fact  is  that  ever}7  one  knows,  that 
their  original  ordination,  as  Presbyters,  or  "Priests," 
as  they  are  called — conveys  the  full  power  to  preach, 
administer  sacraments,  and  perform  every  duty  of  the 
ordinary  parochial  ministration,  statedly,  and  without 
any  further  let  or  impediment.  The  cases  then,  are 
wholly  unlike.  There  were,  evidently,  in  the  days  of 
Ignatius  and  Cyprian,  of  Chrysostom  and  Augus- 
tine, of  Socrates  and  Sozomen,  some  Elders  who  did 
not  ordinarily  preach,  and   were   not   considared   a» 

i2 


102  TESTIMONY  OF 

authorized  to  engage  in  this  part  of  the  public  service, 
without  a  special  permission ;  and  who  stood,  not  exactly, 
indeed,  but  very  much  on  the  same  ground,  as  to  this 
matter,  with  the  Elders  of  our  denomination. 

The  truth  is,  some  of  the  very  same  writers  who 
inform  us  that  Elders  and  Deacons  were  not  ordinarily 
allowed  to  preach  during  the  first  three  or  four  cen- 
turies;— also  inform  us,  that  laymen,  in  causes  of 
necessity,  might  preach  by  the  Bishop's  permission. 
This  at  once  illustrates  and  strengthens  the  Presbyterian 
argument.  For  the  same  authority  which  might  give 
a  special  permission  in  each  case,  or  a  general  permission, 
for  a  time,  to  an  Elder  or  Deacon  to  preach ;  which 
permission,  it  seems,  might  be  revoked  at  pleasure, 
without  touching  the  official  standing  of  the  individual, 
much  less  deposing  him  from  office; — might  also  au- 
thorize the  merest  layman  in  the  whole  parish  to 
perform  the  same  service,  whenever  it  was  judged- 
expedient  to  give  the  license. 

The  truth  of  the  matter  seems  to  have  been  this.  A 
large  majority  of  the  officers  called  Elders,  in  the  three 
first  centuries,  were,  no  doubt,  Riding  Elders — or- 
dained, it  is  probable,  in  the  same  manner  with  the 
Teaching  Elders,  i.  e.,  with  w  the  laying  on  of  hands/' 
and  the  same  external  solemnity  in  every  respect.. 
They  were  not  qualified,  and  were  not  expected,  when 
ordained,  to  be  preachers;  but  were  selected,  on  ac- 
count of  their  piety,  gravity,  prudence,  and  experience, 
to  assist  in  inspection  and  government.  When,  how- 
ever, the  Bishop  or  Pastor,  who  was  the  stated  preacher, 
was  sick,  or  absent,  he  might  direct  a  Ruling  Elder  to 
take  his  place,  on  a  single  occasion,  or  for  a  few 
sabbaths.  But  this  function  made  no  part  of  their 
slated  work;  and  they  seldom  engaged  in  it.    After  a 


THE   FATHERS.  103 

while,  however,  these  Elders,  like  the  Bishops  on  the 
one  hand,  and  the  Deacons  on  the  other,  began  to 
aspire;  were  more  and  more  frequently  permitted  to 
preach;  until,  at  length,  non-preaching  Elders  were 
chiefly  banished  from  the  Church.  As  this  was  a 
gradual  thing,  they  were,  of  course,  retained  in  some 
Churches  longer  than  others.  They  were,  probably, 
first  laid  aside  in  large  cities,  where  ambition  was  most 
prevalent,  laxity  of  morals  most  indulged,  and  strict 
discipline  most  unpopular.  In  this  way  things  pro- 
ceeded, until  this  class  of  officers  was  almost  wholly  lost 
sight  of  in  the  Christian  community. 

One  more  testimony,  by  no  means  unimportant,  of 
the  existence  of  this  office  in  the  primitive  Church,  is  to 
be  found  in  the  Rev.  Dr.  Buchanan! s  account  of  the 
Syrian  Christians,  contained  in  his  Asiatic  Re- 
searches.  It  will  be  borne  in  mind  that  the  learned 
and  pious  author  considers  those  Christians  as  having 
settled  in  the  East,  within  the  first  three  centuries  after 
Christ,  before  the  corruptions  of  the  Church  of  Rome 
had  been  introduced,  and  when  the  original  simplicity 
of  Gospel  order  had  been  but  in  a  small  degree  invaded 
Separating  from  the  Western  Church  at  that  early  pe- 
riod, and  remaining,  for  many  centuries,  almost  wholly 
secluded  from  the  rest  of  the  world,  they  were  found  in 
a  great  measure  free  from  the  innovations  and  super- 
stitions of  the  Papacy.  Now,  if  Ruling  Elders  had  any 
existence  in  the  Christian  Church  within  the  first  three 
hundred  years,  as  Ambrose  expressly  declares  they  had. 
we  might  expect  to  find  the  Syrian  Christians,  in 
their  seclusion,  retaining  some  traces  at  least  of  this 
office  in  their  Churches.  Accordingly,  Dr.  Buchanan, 
in  describing  the  circumstances  of  a  visit  which  he  paid 
one  of  the  Churches  of  this  simple  and  highly  interest- 


104  TESTIMONY  OF 

ing  people,  speaks  as  follows: — "When  we  arrived,  I 
was  received  at  the  door  of  the  Church  by  three  Kas- 
heeshas,  that  is  Presbyters,  or  Priests,  who  were  habited 
in  like  manner,  in  white  vestments.  Their  names 
were  Jesn,  Zecharias,  and  Urias,  which  they  wrote 
down  in  my  journal,  each  of  them  adding  to  his  name 
the  title  Kasheesha.  There  were  also  present  two 
Shnmshanas,  or  Deacons.  The  Elder  Priest  was  a 
very  intelligent  man,  of  reverend  appearance,  having  a 
long  white  beard,  and  of  an  affable  and  engaging  de- 
portment. The  three  principal  Christians,  or  Lay- 
Elders,  belonging  to  the  Church,  were  named  Abra- 
ham, Thomas  and  Alexandres."* 

This  remarkable  fact,  it  is  believed,  belongs  most  pro- 
perly to  the  present  chapter.  For  if  these  simple  Syrian 
Christians  were  really  settled  in  the  East,  as  early  as 
Dr.  Buchanan  seems,  with  good  reason,  to  suppose, 
and  Were,  for  many  centuries  entirely  secluded  from  all 
foreign  influence;  we  may  consider  them  as  having  in 
operation  among  them,  substantially,  that  ecclesiastical 
system  which  existed  through  the  greater  part  of  the 
Christian  Church  at  the  close  of  the  third,  and  the 
beginning  of  the  fourth  century.  A  kind  of  testimony 
which,  of  course,  falls  in  with  our  purpose  in  examining 
the  testimony  of  the  early  ages  of  the  Church. 

Such  then,  is  the  amount  of  the  testimony  from  the 
Christian  Fathers.  They  tell  us,  with  a  unanimity 
and  frequency  truly  remarkable,  that,  in  every  Church, 
there  was  a  bench  or  college  of  Elders: — That  they  sat, 
with  the  Bishop  or  Pastor^  as  an  ecclesiastical  judicatory, 
and  with  him  luled  the  Church: — That  this  bench  or 


*  Christian  Resear  ches  in  Asia,  p.  75.     N.  York  Edit.  12mc 
1812. 


THE  FATHERS.  105 

body  of  rulers  was  called  by  various  names  in  different 
parts  of  tbe  world ; — such  as,  Ecclesim  Consessus — 
the  Session  or  Consistory  of  the  Church;  twv  orgstf&rfMw 
(fuvs^iov,  the  court  or  Sanhedrim  of  the  Elders; — Ec~ 
clesi(B  Senatas,  the  Senate  of  the  Church ; — BouX*; 
exxXr^dias  the  Council  of  the  Church,  &c,  &c: — That 
they  were  always  present  with  the  Bishop  or  Pastor 
when  he  presided  in  public  worship: — That  he  did 
nothing  of  importance  without  consulting  them: — 
That  they  seldom  or  never  preached,  unless  in  cases  of 
necessity,  or  when  specially  requested  to  do  so  by  the 
pastor: — That  they  were  more  frequently  than  other- 
wise called  clergymen,  like  the  Elders  who  "  labored 
in  the  word  and  doctrine,"  but  sometimes  distinguished 
from  the  clergy: — That,  however,  whether  called  cler- 
gymen or  not,  they  were  "ecclesiastical  men,"  that  is, 
set  apart  for  ecclesiastical  purposes,  devoted  to  the  spi- 
ritual rule  and  edification  of  the  Church: — That  all 
questions  of  discipline,  such  as  admitting  members  into 
the  Church,  inspecting  their  Christian  deportment, and 
censuring,  suspending  and  excommunicating,  were  de- 
cided by  these  Elders:  and,  finally,  from  all  it  is  appa- 
rent, that  as  discipline  became  unpopular,  and  ecclesias- 
tics more  aspiring,  the  ruling  part  of  the  Elder's  office 
was  gradually  laid  aside,  and  the  teaching  part  alone 
retained, 


CHAPTER  V. 

TESTIMONY  OF  THE  WITNESSES  FOR  THE  TRtTttj 
DURING  THE  DARK  AGES. 

It  has  been  the  habit  of  zealous  and  high-toned 
Prelatists,  for  more  than  two  centuries  past,  as  well  as 
of  some  Independents,  to  assert,  that  Ruling  Elders 
were  unknown  in  the  Christian  Church  until  about  the 
year  1541 :  that  then  Calvin  invented  the  order,  and 
introduced  it  into  the  Church  of  Geneva,  And  some 
worthy  men,  of  other  denominations,  have  allowed 
themselves,  with  more  haste  than  good  advisement,  to 
adopt  and  repeat  the  assertion.  It  is  an  assertion  wThich, 
undoubtedly,  cannot  be  made  good;  as  the  following 
testimonies  will  probably  satisfy  every  impartial  reader. 

At  how  early  a  period  the  Old  Waldenses  took  their 
rise  is  uncertain.  In  some  of  their  Confessions  of  Faith, 
and  other  ecclesiastical  documents,  dated  at  the  com- 
mencement, or  soon  after  the  commencement,  of  the 
Reformation  by  Luther,  they  speak  of  their  Doctrine 
and  Order  as  having  been  handed  down  from  father 
to  son  for  more  than  Jive  hundred  years.  But  Rei- 
nerius,  wrho  himself  lived  about  two  hundred  and  fifty 
years  before  Luther,  who  had  once  resided  among  the 
Waldenses,  but  afterwards  became  one  of  their  bitterest 
persecutors,  seems  to  ascribe  to  that  people  a  much 
earlier  origin.  "They  are  more  pernicious/'  says  he, 
*:to  the  Church  of  Rome  than  any  other  set  of  here^ 


THE  WITNESSES,  &C.  107 

tics,  for  three  reasons: — 1.  Because  they  are  older  than 
any  other  sect;  for  some  say  that  they  have  been  ever 
since  the  time  of  Pope  Sylvester,  (who  was  raised  to 
the  Papal  chair  in  314;)  and  others  say,  from  the  time 
of  the  Apostles.*  2.  Because  they  are  more  extensively 
spread  than  any  other  sect;  there  being  scarcely  a 
country  into  which  they  have  not  crept.  3.  Because 
other  sects  are  abominable  to  God  for  their  blasphemies; 
but  the  Waldenses  are  more  pious  than  any  other 
heretics ;  they  believe  truly  of  God,  live  justly  before 
men,  and  receive  all  the  articles  of  the  creed ;  only  they 
hate  the  Church  of  Rome? 

Now,  John  Paul  Perrin,  the  well  known  historian 
of  the  Waldenses,  and  who  was  himself  one  of  the 
ministers  of  that  people,  in  a  number  of  places  recog- 
nizes the  office  of  Elder,  distinguished  from  that  of 
Pastor,  or  Teacher,  as  retained  in  their  Churches.  He 
expressly  and  repeatedly  represents  their  Synods  as 
composed  of  Ministers  and  Elders.  The  same  writer 
tells  us  that,  in  the  year  1476,  the  Hussites,  being  en- 
gaged in  separating  and  reforming  their  Churches  from 
the  Church  of  Rome,  understood  that  there  were  some 
Churches  of  the  ancient  Waldenses  in  Austria,  in 
which  the  purity  of  the  gospel  was  retained,  and  in 
which  there  were  many  eminent  Pastors.  In  order  to 
ascertain  the  truth  of  this  account,  they  (the  Hussites) 
sent  two  of  their  Ministers,  with  two  Elders,  to  inquire 
and  ascertain  what  those  flocks  or  congregations  were.* 

*  Reinerius  flourished  about  A.  D.,  1250,  more  than  250 
years  before  the  Reformation  ;  and,  at  that  time,  he  speaks  of 
the  Waldenses  as  an  ancient  people,  of  too  remote  an  origin 
to  be  traced  with  distinctness  and  certainty. 

f  History  of  the  Old  Waldenses,  Part  ii.  Book  I,  Chap.  10. 
Book  2,  Chap.  4.     Book  5,  Chap.  7. 


108  TESTIMONY   OP 

The  same  historian,  in  the  same  work,  speaks  of  the 
Ministers,  and  Elders  of  the  Bohemian  Churches.* 
Now  the  Bohemian  Brethren,  it  is  well  known,  were 
a  branch  of  the  same  people  called  WaldensesA  They 
had  removed  from  Picardy,  in  the  north  of  France, 
about  two  hundred  years  before  the  time  of  Huss  and 
Jerome,  to  Bohemia,  and  there,  in  conjunction  with 
many  natives  of  the  country,  whom  they  brought  over 
to  their  opinions,  established  a  number  of  pure  Churches, 
which  long  maintained  the  simplicity  of  the  gospel. 
The  undoubted  existence  of  Ruling  Elders,  then, 
among  the  Bohemian  Brethren,  affords  in  itself,  strong 
presumptive  proof  that  the  same  class  of  officers  existed 
in  other  branches  of  the  same  body.    And,  accordingly, 
a  Synod,  of  which  we  have  an  account,  as  held  in 
Piedmont,  in  Italy,  in  1570,  is  represented,  repeatedly, 
as  made  up  of  "Pastors  and  Elders?    Again;  in  the 
Form  of  Government  of  the  same  people,  in  the  chapter 
on  Excommunication,  we  find  the  following  direction 
respecting  the  disorderly,  who  refuse  to  listen  to  private 
admonition : — "  Tell  it  to  the  Church,"  that  is,  to  the 
"Guides,  whereby  the  Church  is  ruled;"  and  that  we 
may  be  at  no  loss  who  these  "Rulers"  were,  we  are 
told,  in  a  preceding  chapter,  that  they  were  Elders 
chosen  from  among  the  people  for  the  purpose  of  go- 
verning ;  and  informed  that  they  were  distinct  from 
the  pastors. 

The  testimony  of  Perrin  and  others,  is  supported  by 
that  of  M.  Gillis,  another  historian  of  the  Waldenses, 
and  also  one  of  their  Pastors.     In  the  Confession  of 

*  Part  ii.  Book  2.  chapter  9,  10. 

f  Hislory  of  the  Waldenses,  4to.  1055,  published  by  order  of 
Cromwell. 


THE   W1TNESSKS,  &C.  109 


Faith  of  that  people,  inserted  at  length  in  the  M  Addi- 
tion" to  this  work,  and  stated  by  the  historian  to  hare 
been  the  Confession  of  the  Ancient,  as  well  as  of  the 
Modern  Waldenses,  it  is  declared,  (p.  490 — Art.  31,) 
that  "It  is  necessary  for  the  Church  to  have  Pastors, 
to  preach  God's  word,  to  administer  the  sacraments,  and 
to  watch  over  the  sheep  of  Jesus  Christ;  and  also 
Elders  and  Deacons,  according  to  the  rules  of  good 
and  holy  Church  discipline,  and  the  practice  of  the 
primitive  Church" 

Sir  Samuel  Morcland,  who  visited  the  Waldenses 
in  the  year  1056,  and  took  unwearied  pains  to  learn 
from  themselves  their  History,  as  well  as  their  Doctrine 
and  Order;  informs  us  that,  besides  their  Synodical 
meetings,  which  took  place  once  a  year,  when  all  can- 
didates for  the  pastoral  office  were  commonly  ordained, 
they  had  also  Consistories  in  their  respective  Churches, 
by  means  of  which  pure  Discipline  wag  constantly 
maintained.* 

Accordingly,  the  Rev.  Dr.  Ranken,  in  his  laboriously 
learned  History  of  France,  gives  the  following  account 
of  the  Waklenses  and  Albigenses,  whom  he  very  pro- 
perly represents  as  the  same  people.  "Their  govern- 
ment and  discipline  were  extremely  simple^  The  youth 
intended  for  the  ministry  among  them,  were  placed  under 
the  inspection  of  some  of  the  elder  barbes>  or  pastors,  who 
trained  them  chiefly  to  the  knowledge  of  the  Scriptures; 
and  when  satisfied  of  their  proficiency,  they  received 
them  as  preachers,  with  imposition  of  hands.  Their 
pastors  were  maintained  by  the  voluntary  offerings  of 
the  people.     The  whole  Church  assembled  once  a  year, 

i     i   ii     "  i  i  T 

*  History  of  the  Evangelical  Churches  of  Piedmonty  Book  i. 
chapter  viii. 

K 


110  TESTIMONY  OP 

to  treat  of  their  general  affairs.  Contributions  were  then 
obtained;  and  the  common  fund  was  divided,  for  the 
year,  among  not  only  the  fixed  pastors,  but  such  as  were 
itinerant,  and  had  no  particular  district  or  charge.  If 
any  of  them  had  fallen  into  scandal  or  sin,  they  were 
prohibited  from  preaching,  and  thrown  out  of  the  society, 
The  pastors  were  assisted  in  their  inspection  of  the  peo- 
ple's morals,  by  Elders,  whom  probably  both  pastors  and 
people  elected,  and  set  apart  for  that  purpose."* 

Further ;  not  only  does  Perrin  speak  of  the  Minis- 
ters  and  Elders  of  the  Bohemian  Churches,  thereby 
plainly  intimating  that  they  had  a  class  of  Elders 
distinct  from  their  Pastors,  or  Preachers ;  but  the 
same  thing  is  placed  beyond  the  possibility  of  doubt  or 
question  by  the  Bohemian  Brethren  themselves,  who? 
in  the  year  1535,  presented  a  Confession  of  their  Faith, 
to  Ferdinand,  king  of  Hungary  and  Bohemia,  with 
a  friendly  and  highly  commendatory  Preface  by  Luther; 
and  who,  a  number  of  years  afterward  published  their 
"Plan  of  Government  and  Discipline"  which  con- 
tains the  following  paragraph : — 

"Elders  (Presbyteri,  seu  Censores  morum)  are 
honest,  grave,  pious  men,  chosen  out  of  the  whole  con- 
gregation,  that  they  may  act  as  guardians  of  all  the  rest. 
To  them  authority  is  given,  (either  alone,  or  in  con- 
nexion with  the  Pastor)  to  admonish  and  rebuke  those 
who  transgress  the  prescribed  rules,  also  to  reconcile 
those  who  are  at  variance,  and  to  restore  to  order  what- 
ever irregularity  they  may  have  noticed.  Likewise  in 
secular  matters,  relating  to  domestic  concerns,  the 
younger  men  and  youths  are  in  the  habit  of  asking 
their  counsel,  and  of  being  faithfully  advised  by  them. 

*  Hitlory  ofFrancey  Vol.  iii.  p.  203,  204. 


THE    WITNESSES,  JtC.  Ill 

From  the  example  and  practice  of  the  ancient  Church, 
we  believe  that  this  ought  always  to  be  done;  See 
Exodus  xviii.  21. — Duteronomy  i.  13. — 1  Cor.  vi.  2, 
4,  5.— 1  Tim.  v.  17." 

This,  they  say,  at  the  close,  "is  the  ecclesiastical  order 
which  they  and  their  forefathers  had  had  established 
among  them  for  two  hundred  years;*  which  they  de- 
rived from  the  word  of  God;  which  they  maintained 
through  much  persecution,  and  with  much  patience, 
and  which  they  had  observed  with  much  happy  fruit  to 
themselves,  and  to  the  people  of  God."t 

And  tli at  all  mistake  might  be  precluded  respecting 
the  real  import  of  the  above  stated  clauses,  the  Bohe- 
mian historian  and  commentator,  Comenius,  makes 
the  following  remarks  on  the  Elders  in  question: — 

"  Presbyter,  a  Greek  term,  signifying  the  same  with 
Senior,  in  Latin,  (an  Elder,)  is  applied  by  the  Apostles 
both  to  the  Pastors  of  the  Church,  and  to  those  who 
assisted  them  in  taking  care  of  the  flock,  who  do  not 
labor  in  the  word  and  doctrine;  1  Timothy  v.  17. 
Such  arc  our  Elders;  they  are  styled  Judges  of  the 
congregation,  or  Censors  of  the  people,  and  also 
Ruling  Elders.  I  am  not  ignorant,  indeed,  that  Hugo 
Grotius,  has  labored  hard  to  prove  that,  in  the  Apostles 
days,  there  were  no  other  Presbyters  than  Pastors; 

•  The  u  Plan  of  Government  and  Discipline,"  from  which  the 
above  extracts  are  made,  was  drawn  up  by  their  "  General 
Synod"  in  1616,  and  printed  in  1632.  When,  therefore,  they 
declare  that  they  and  their  forefathers  had  enjoyed  the  same 
order  for  two  hundred  years,  it  carries  back  the  date  of  this 
system  to  1416,  that  is,  to  the  time  of  John  Huss;  and,  of  course, 
nearly  a  century  before  the  birth  of  Calvin. 

t  Jo.  Amos  Comenii  Historic/.  Fratrum  Bohemorum  Ratio 
Q-isciplinoi  Ordinisquex&i,c.  11.  56.  68. 


112  TESTIMONY  OF 

and  that  he  assigns  a  different  meaning  to  the  passage 
in  t  Timothy  v.  17.  Yet,  inasmuch  as  he  finally  con- 
fesses, that,  although  suck  Elders  of  the  Church  as 
sit  with  the  Pastors  in  Ecclesiastical  Judicatories) 
bean  institution  of  human  prudence,  they  are,  never- 
theless, very  useful,  and  ought  by  all  means  to  be 
retained,  I  hope  no  one  will  easily  find  any  reasonable 
objection.  To  guard  against  abuses,  he  subjoins  very 
judicious  cautions,  at  the  close  of  chapter  xi.  of  the  book 
which  he  entitled,  De  Imperio  Summarum  Protesta- 
tum  circa  Sacra"* 

hi  precisely  the  same  manner  are  both  the  theory 
and  practice  of  the  Bohemian  Brethren  understood  by 
the  celebrated  Martin  Bucer,  a  very  learned  Lutheran 
divine,  whose  fame,  throughout  Europe,  induced  Arch- 
bishop Cranmer  to  invite  him  to  England,  during  the 
progress  of  the  Reformation  in  that  country,  where  he 
received  patronage  and  preferment,  and  was  held  in 
high  estimation.  Bucer  was  a  contemporary  of  the 
Bohemian  worthies  who  published  the  exhibition  of 
their  faith  and  practice  above  quoted,  and,  of  course,  had 
every  oportunity  of  knowing  both  its  letter  and  spirit. 
He  speaks  of  it  in  the  following  terms: — 

"  The  Bohemian  Brethren ,(P\csirdi,)j  who  published 
a  Confession  of  their  faith,  in  the  year  1535,  with  a 
Preface  by  Luther,  and  who  almost  alone  preserved  in 

*  Jlnnolationes  ad  Ralionem  Orai7iis  Fratrum  Bohemorum^  aci> 
Cap.  i.  p.  63. 

t  Bucer  styles  these  worthy  people,  Fratres  Picardi,  in  refer- 
ence to  their  origin  from  the  Waldenses,  or  rather  the  branch 
called  Albigenses  in  France,  to  which  those  who  migrated  to 
Bohemia  belonged.  But  the  people  to  whom  he  refers  are- 
ascertained  with,  unerring  certainty  by  the  "Confession  of 
Faith"  which  he  so  precisely  describes. 


THE  WITNESSES,  AC.  113 

the  world  the  purity  of  the  doctrine,  and  the  vigor  of 
the  discipline  of  Christ,  observed  an  excellent  rule  for 
which  wc  are  compelled  to  give  them  credit,  and  espe- 
cially to  praise  that  God  who  thus  wrought  by  them, 
notwithstanding  those  brethren  are  preposterously  de- 
spised by  some  learned  men.      The  rule  which  they 
observe  was  this :   besides  Ministers  of  the    Word 
and  Sacraments,  they  had,  in  each  Church,  a  bench 
or  College  of  men,  excelling  in  gravity,  and  prudence, 
who  performed  the  duties  of  admonishing  and  correct- 
ing offenders  composing  differences,  and  judicially  de- 
ciding in  cases  of  dispute.      Of  this  kind  of  Elders. 
Hilary  (A??ibrose)  wrote,  when  he  said — "Therefore 
the  Synagogue  and  afterwards  the  Church  had  Elders, 
without  whose  counsel  nothing  was  done."* 

It  would  seem  difficult  to  deny  or  resist  this  testimony 
that  the  Bohemian  Brethren  held  to  Ruling  Elders, 
and  actually  maintained  this  class  of  officers  in  their 
Churches.    Could  Bucer,  whom  Mr.  Middleton,  in  his 
Biographia  Evangelica,  represents  as  "a  man  of  im- 
mense learning,"  and  who  is  spoken  of,  by  Bishop  Bur- 
net, as,  "perhaps,  inferior  to  none  of  all  the  Reformers 
for  learning:" — could  he  have  been  ignorant,  either  of 
the  real  meaning  of  a  public  document,  put  forth  in  his 
own  time,  or  of  the  public  and  uniform  practice  of  a  body 
of  pious  people,  whom  he  seems  to  have  regarded  with 
so  much  respect  and  affection,  as  witnesses  for  God  in 
a  dark  world  ?   It  cannot  be  imagined.    And  what  gives 
additional  weight  to  the  testimony  of  this  illustrious 
man  is,  that  he  seems  to  have  had  no  interest  what- 
ever in  vindicating  this  class  of  Church  officers;  for  it 


♦  Scrip' a  duo  Adversaria  Latomi,  &c.  in  Cap.  De  Eccletia 
Autoritate,  p.  159. 

K    2 


114  TESTIMONY  OF 

is  not  known  that  he  ever  had  any  special  inducement,, 
from  a  sense  of  reputation,  or  any  other  cause,  to  exert; 
himself  in  maintaining  them;  and  the  latter  part  of 
his  life  was  spent  in  England,  in  the  service  of  the 
established  Church  of  that  kingdom,  in  the  bosom  of 
which  he  died. 

As  a  further  confirmation  of  Bucer's  judgment  in 
reference  to  the  Bohemian  Brethren,  the  celebrated 
John  Francis  Buddams,  an  eminently  learned  Lu- 
theran divine  of  Germany,  of  the  seventeenth  century, 
who  gave  an  edition,  with  a  large  preface,  of  the  work 
of  Comenius,  in  which  the  History  of  the  Bohemian- 
Brethren,  and  their  Form,  of  Government,  are  pub- 
lished, evidently  understands  their  plan  in  reference  to 
the  office  of  Ruling  Elder,  precisely  as  Bucer,  and  other 
learned  men  have  understood  it.  He  employs  the 
greater  part  of  his  preface  in  recommending  this  office.. 
And,  although  he  does  not  seem  prepared  to  allow  that 
it  existed,  as  a  separate  office,  in  the  apostolic  Church ; 
yet  he  thinks  that,  virtually,  and  in  substance,  it  did 
make  a  part  of  the  apostolic  system  of  supervision  and 
order.  He  thinks,  moreover,  that,  without  some  such 
office,  it  is  wholly  imposible  to  maintain  pure  morals, 
and  sound  discipline  in  the  Church  of  God ;  and  that 
the  Bohemian  Brethren,  rendered  a  most  important 
service  to  the  cause  of  truth  and  piety  in  maintaining 
it  in  their  ecclesiastical  system.* 

Luther,  in  some  of  his  early  writings,  had  expressed 
an  unfavorable  opinion  of  the  Bohemian  Brethren  ;  but, 
upon  being  more  fully  informed  of  their  Doctrine  and 
Order,  and  more  especially  of  their  provision  for  main- 

*  Jo.  Francisci  Buddabi,  Praesahq  tfe  instauranda  Di*-. 
riplina  Ecclesiastica — Passim. 


THE  WITNESSES,   &C.  115 

taining  sound  discipline,  by  means  of  their  Eldership 
in  each  congregation,  he  changed  his  opinion,  and 
became  willing  both  to  speak  and  to  write  strongly  in 
their  favor.  Hence,  his  highly  commendatory  Preface, 
to  their  "  Confession  of  Faith"  of  which  mention 
has  been  already  made.  And  hence,  at  a  still  later 
period,  the  following  strong  expressions  in  favor  of  the 
same  people.  "There  hath  not  arisen  any  people, 
since  the  times  of  the  Apostles,  whose  Church  hath- 
come  nearer  to  the  apostolical  doctrine  and  order,  than 
the  Brethrenof  .Bohemia."  And  again;  "although  these 
Brethren  do  not  excel  us  in  purity  of  doctrine,  (all  the 
articles  of  faith  with  us  being  sincerely  and  purely  taken 
out  of  the  Word  of  God,)  yet  in  the  ordinary  discipline 
of  the  Church  which  they  use,  and  whereby  they  hap- 
pily govern  the  Churches,  they  go  far  beyond  us,  and 
are,  in  this  respect,  far  more  praise-worthy.  And  we 
cannot  but  acknowledge  and  yield  this  to  them,  for 
the  Glory  of  God,  and  of  his  truth;  whereas  our  people 
of  Germany  cannot  be  persuaded  to  be  willing  to  take 
the  yoke  of  discipline  upon  them."* 

It  is  presumed  that  no  one,  after  impartially  weighing 
the  foregoing  testimonies,  will  listen,  for  one  moment, 
with  any  respect  to  the  allegation,  that  the  plan  of  a 
Bench  of  Elders  for  ruling  the  Church  and  conducting 
its  discipline,  wras  invented  by  Calvin.  But  we  may 
go  further.  The  truth  is  that,  instead  of  the  Walden- 
ses,  or  Bohemian  Brethren  taking  this  order  of  officers 
from  Calvin,  it  may  be  affirmed,  that  precisely  the 
reverse  was  the  fact.  We  have  satisfactory  evi- 
dence that  Calvin  took  the  hint  from  the  Bohemian 
Brethren;  and  that  the  system  which  he  afterward* 

*  Jos*.  A.  Comenii  Historia  Bohem.  Fral.  Sect.  02, 


116  TESTIMONY  OF 

established  in  Geneva,  was  really  suggested  and 
prompted  by  the  example  of  those  pious  sufferers  and 
witnesses  for  the  truth,  who  had  this  class  of  officers  in 
their  Churches  long  before  Calvirfs  day.  This  will  be 
made  clearly  to  appear  from  the  following  stement. 

When  Calvin  first  settled  in  Geneva,  in  1536,  he 
found  the  Reformed  Religion  already  introduced,  and, 
to  a  considerable  extent,  supported,  under  the  ministry 
of  Far  el  and  Viret,  two  bold  and  faithful  advocates  of 
evangelical  trnth.     Such,  however,  was  the  opposition 
made  to  the  doctrines  which  they  preached,  and  espe- 
cially to  the  purity  of  discipline  which  they  struggled 
hard  to  establish,  by  the  licentious  part  of  the  inhabi- 
tants, among  whom  were  some  of  the  leading  Magis- 
trates: that,  in  1538,  Calvin  and  his  Colleagues  were 
expelled  from  their  places  in  the    Genevan    Church, 
because  they  refused  to  administer  the  Lord's  Supper 
to  the  vilest  of  the  population  who  chose  to  demand  the 
privilege.     In  a  paroxysm  of  popular  fury,  those  faith- 
ful ministers  of  Christ  were  commanded  to  leave  the 
city  within  two  days.     During  this  temporary  triumph 
of  error  and  profiagacy,  Calvin  retired  to  Strasburg, 
where  he  was  appointed  Professor  of   Divinity  and 
Pastor  of  a  Church,  and  where  he  remained  nearly 
four  years. 

In  1540,  the  year  before  he  was  recalled  to  GenevaT 
he  corresponded  with  the  Bohemian  Brethren,  and 
made  himself  particularly  acquainted  with  their  plan 
of  Church  government,  which  he  regarded  with  deep 
interest;  an  interest,  no  doubt  greatly  augmented  by 
the  sufferings  which  he  had  recently  undergone  in 
fruitless  efforts  to  maintain  the  purity  of  ecclesiastical 
discipline;  in  which  efforts  he  had  been  baffled  chiefly 
by  the  want  of  such  an  efficient  system  as  the  Bohe- 


THE  WITNESSES,  AC  117 

mian  Churches  possessed.  In  the  course  of  this  cor- 
respondence, while  yet  in  exile  for  his  fidelity,  Calvin 
addressed  the  Bohemian  Pastors  in  the  following  pointed 
terms: — "I  heartily  congratulate  your  Churches,  upon 
which,  besides  sound  doctrine,  God  hath  bestowed  so 
many  excellent  gifts.  Of  these  gift3,  it  is  none  of  the 
least  to  have  such  Pastors  to  govern  and  order  them; 
to  have  a  people  themselves  so  well  affected  and  dis- 
posed ; — to  be  constituted  under  so  noble  a  form  of 
government ; — to  be  adorned  with  the  most  excellent 
discipline,  which  we  justly  call  most  excellent,  and,  in- 
deed, the  only  bond  by  which  obedience  can  be  pre- 
served. I  am  sure  we  find  with  us,  by  woful  experience-, 
what  the  worth  of  it  is,  by  the  want  of  it;  nor  yet  can 
we  by  any  means  attain  to  it.  On  this  account  it  is, 
that  I  am  often  faint  in  my  mind,  and  feeble  in  tha 
discharge  of  the  duties  of  my  office.  Indeed  1  sfcotttd 
quite  despair,  did  not  this  comfort  me,  that  the  edifica- 
tion of  the  Church  is  always  the  work  of  the  Lord, 
which  He  himself  will  carry  on  by  his  own  power, 
though  all  help  beside  should  fail.  Yet  still  it  is  a 
great  and  rare  blessing  to  be  aided  by  so  necessary  a 
help.  Therefore  1  shall  not  consider  our  Church  as 
properly  strengthened,  until  they  can  be  bound  to- 
gether by  that  bond."  And  the  pious  historian,  after 
giving  this  extract  from  the  venerable  Reformer,  adds : 
"  It  so  happened,  in  the  course  of  divine  providence, 
that,  not  long  afterwards,  this  eminent  man  was  re- 
called to  minister  in  the  Church  of  Geneva,  where  he 
established  the  very  same  kind  of  discipline, 
which  is  now  famed  throughout  the  world."* 

Testimony  more  direct  and  conclusive  could  scarcely 
— — —         ■■  ■_> 

*  Jqxi,  A.  Com  en  ii  IJidoria  Bohcm.  Frat.  Std.  00. 


118  TESTIMONY  OF 

be  desired.  Comenius,  himself  a  Bishop  of  the  Bohe- 
mian Brethren,  surely  knew  what  kind  of  Eldership  it 
was  which  was  established  among  the  Churches  of  his 
own  denomination.  He  says  it  was  the  very  same 
with  that  which  Calvin  afterwards  established  in 
Geneva.  We  know,  too,  that  this  venerable  man, 
before  he  was  expelled  from  Geneva,  in  1538,  and 
while  he  was  struggling  and  suffering  so  much  for 
want  of  an  efficient  discipline,  made  no  attempt  to 
introduce  the  institution  in  question.  But,  during  his 
painful  exile,  his  attention  is  forcibly  turned  to  the 
Bohemian  plan.  He  is  greatly  pleased  with  it;  speaks 
in  the  strongest  terms  of  its  excellence;  declares  that  he 
has  no  hope  of  any  Church  prospering  until  it  is  intro- 
duced; and  the  very  next  year,  on  his  return,  makes 
it  one  of  the  conditions  of  his  resuming  his  pastoral 
charge,  that  this  plan  of  conducting  the  discipline  of 
the  Church,  by  a  bench  of  Elders,  shall  be  received  with 
him,  and  thus  causes  it  to  be  adopted  in  Geneva. 

And  yet  the  historian  of  the  Waldenses,  John  Paul 
Perrin,  has  been  reproached,  and  insinuations  made 
unfavorable  to  his  honesty,  because  he  has  represented 
the  Bohemian  Brethren  as  having  ecclesiastical  Elders 
distinct  from  their  Ministers  of  the  gospel.  How  utterly 
unjust  such  reproaches  are,  every  one  must  now  see. 
If  there  were  ever  Ruling  Elders  in  Geneva,  they  were 
found  in  the  Churches  of  Bohemia.  Nor  is  it  any  solid 
objection  to  the  fact,  as  we  have  stated  it,  that  they  had 
some  other  features  in  their  system  of  Church  order, 
which  were  not  strictly  Presbyterian.  All  that  the  his- 
torian has  to  do  is  with  facts.  Having  stated  these,  he 
is  answerable  for  nothing  more.  That  those  Churches 
gave  the  title  of  Seniors,  but  more  frequently  of  Antis- 
tites  to  certain  elderly  clergyman,  who  were  peculiarly 


THE  WITNESSES,  &C  119 

venerable  in  their  character,  and  who  chiefly  took  tho 
lead  in  all  ordinations,  is,  no  doubt,  true;  that,  in  their 
plan  of  Church  government,  they  distinguished  their 
Diaconi  from  their  Eleemosynarii ;  and  that  they  in- 
clude in  the  list  of  their  ecclesiastical  offices,  some  which 
are  strictly  secular,  is  also  manifest.  But  surely  none 
of  these  invalidate  the  fact,  that  they  had  Ruling  El 
ders;  a  fact  stated  in  a  manner  which  it  is  impossible 
either  to  doubt  or  mistake. 

Thus  we  have  good  evidence,  that  all  the  most  dis 
tinguished  and  faithful  witnesses  for  the  truth,  during 
the  dark  ages,  with  whose  faith  and  order  we  have  any 
minute  acquaintance,  carefully  maintained  the  office 
for  which  we  are  contending ;  that  some  of  them,  at 
least,  considered  it  as  of  Divine  appointment,  and 
accordingly  quote  in  its  support  Scriptural  authority ; 
and  that  they  appear,  with  good  reason,  to  have  regard- 
ed it  as  one  of  the  most  efficient  means,  under  the 
Divine  blessing,  of  promoting  the  spiritual  order  and 
edilication  of  the  Church, 


CHAPTER  VI. 

TESTIMONY  OF  THE  REFORMERS,  &  OTHER  LEARNED 
AND  DISINTERESTED  WITNESSES,  NEARLY  CON- 
TEMPORARY WITH  THEM. 

We  have  seen  how  utterly  groundless  is  the  asser- 
tion, that  Riding  Elders  were  invented  and  first  in- 
troduced by  Calvin  at  Geneva.  If  there  be  any  truth 
in  history,  they  were  in  use  long  before  Calvin  was 
born,  and  in  the  purest  Churches  on  earth,  to  say  nothing 
of  their  apostolical  origin.  Nor  is  this  all.  It  may  fur- 
ther be  maintained,  that  a  great  majority  of  the  Refor- 
mers, in  organizing  those  Churches  which  separated 
from  the  Church  of  Rome,  either  actually  introduced 
this  class  of  officers,  or,  in  their  published  writings, 
freely  and  fully  declared  in  its  favor.  And  this  was  the 
case,  as  we  shall  presently  see,  not  merely  on  the  part  of 
those  who  followed  Calvin)  both  as  to  time  and  opinion ; 
but  also  on  the  part  of  those  who  either  preceded,  or  had 
no  ecclesiastical  connexion  whatever,  with  that  illustri- 
ous man;  and  who  were  far  from  agreeing  with  him  in 
many  other  particulars.  Now  this  is  surely  a  marvellous 
fact,  if,  as  some  respectable  writers  would  persuade  us 
to  believe,  the  office  in  question  is  a  mere  figment  of 
Genevan  contrivance,  toward  the  middle  of  the  six- 
teenth century. 

The  first  Reformer  whose  testimony  I  shall  adduce, 
in  favor  of  this  office,  is  Ulrick  Zuingle,  the  celebrated 
leader  in  the  work  of  Reformation  in  Switzerland, 


THE    REFORMERS.  121 

And  I  mention  him  first,  because,  as  he  never  was 
connected  with  Calvin;  nay,  as  he  wag  removed  by 
death,  in  1531,  Jive  years  before  Calvin  ever  saw 
Geneva,  or  appeared  in  the  ranks  of  the  Reformers, 
and  ten  years  before  the  introduction  of  Ruling  Elders 
into  that  city,  he  cannot  be  suspected  of  speaking 
as  the  humble  imitator  of  that  justly  honored  indi- 
vidual. 

On  the  subject  of  Ruling  Elders,  Zuingle  speaks 
thus: — "The  title  of  Presbyter  or  Elder ',  as  used  in 
Scripture,  is  not  rightly  understood  by  those  who  con- 
sider  it  as  applicable  only  to  those  who  preside  in 
preaching:    For   it  is  evident  that  the  term  is  also 
sometimes  used  to  designate  Elders,  of  another  kind, 
that  is,  Senators,  Leaders,  or  Counsellors.     So  we 
read  Acts  xv\,  where  it  is  said,  the  Apostles  and  Elders 
come  together  to  consider  of  this  matter.     Here  we 
see  that  the  Elders  spoken  of  are  to  be  considered 
as  Senators   or  Counsellors.     It  is  evident  that  the 
vgtgflunfm  mentioned  in  this  place  were  not  Minister* 
of  the  word;  but  that  they  were  aged,  prudent  and 
venerable  men,  who,  in  directing  and  managing  the 
affairs  of  the  Church,  were  the  same   thing   as   the 
Senators  in  our  cities.     And  the  title  Elder  is  used  in 
the  same  sense,  in  many  other  places  in  the  Acts  of  the 
Apostles.''* 

Again ;  Occolampadius^ho  also  died  before  Calvin 
appeared  as  an  active  Reformer,  and  of  course  before 


•  This  quotation  from  Zuingle,  is  taken  from  the  Politico; 
Ecclesiasticceof  Voetius,  in  which  it  is  cited  for  the  same  purpose 
as  here;  a  copy  of  the  works  of  the  Swiss  Reformer  not  being- 
at  present  within  the  reach  of  the  writer  of  the  Essay. 

L 


122  TESTIMONY  OP 

the  introduction  of  Ruling  Elders  in  the  Church  of 
Geneva,  speaks  thus,  in  an  Oration  which  he  pro- 
nounced before  the  Senate  of  Basil,  in  1530,  about  a 
year  before  his  death.  "But  it  is  evident  that  those 
which  are  here  intended,  are  certain  Seniors  or  Elders, 
such  as  were  in  the  Apostle's  days,  and  who  of  old  time 
were  called  vtgesfiwrsgoi,  whose  judgment,  being  that  of 
the  most  prudent  part  of  the  Church,  was  considered 
as  the  decision  of  the  whole  Church." 

Here,  again,  is  the  testimony  of  a  man,  who  could 
not  have  been  influenced  by  any  knowledge  of  the 
opinions  of  Calvin,  for  Calvin  had,  as  yet,  published 
no  opinions  on  the  subject: — and  who  yet  speaks  in 
very  unequivocal  terms  of  a  class  of  officers,  as  not  only 
existing  afterwards,  but  as  of  apostolical  institution; 
which,  according  to  some,  were  not  known  in  the 
Church,  either  in  theory  or  practice,  for  ten  years  after 
the  decease  of  this  distinguished  reformer. 

The  testimony  of  Martin  Buccr,  as  one  of  the  most 
venerable  and  active  of  the  Reformers,  properly  belongs 
to  this  branch  of  the  subject.  But  as  his  sentiment* 
were  so  fully  detailed  in  the  quotation  from  him, 
presented  in  the  preceding  chapter,  it  is  not  deemed 
necessary  to  repeat  the  statement  here.  From  that  ex- 
tract it  is  evident,  not  only  that  he  approved  of  the 
office  of  Ruling  Elder,  as  of  eminent  use  in  the  Church; 
but  also  that  he  considered  Ambrose  as  asserting  that 
officers  of  this  class  were  found  in  the  primitive  Church, 
and  that  he  agreed  with  the  pious  Father  in  maintaining 
this  assertion.  Here  was  another  eminently  learned 
man,  and  a  contemporary  of  Calvin,  who  bears  testi- 
mony, that  Ruling  Elders  were  in  use,  in  the  purest 
portion  of  the  Christian  Church,  as  a  laudable  and 


THF.    REFORMERS.  123 

scriptural  institution,  centuries  before  the  Reformer  of 
Geneva  was  born. 

The  character  of  Peter  Martyr,  a  celebrated  Pro- 
testant divine  of  Italy,  whose  high  reputation  induced 
Edward  VI.,  to  invite  him  to  England,  where  he  was 
made  Professor  of  Divinity  at  Oxford,  and  Canon  of 
Christ  Church,  speaks  of  Ruling  Eiders  in  the  follow- 
ing decisive  terms: — "The  Church"  (speaking  of  the 
Primitive  Church)  "had  its  Elders,  or,  if  I  may  so 
speak,  its  Senate,  who  consulted  about  things  which 
were  for  edification  for  the  time  being.  Paul  describes 
this  kind  of  ministry;  not  only  in  the  12th  chapter  of 
the  Epistles  to  the  Romans,  but  also  in  the  first  Episde 
to  Timothy,  where  he  thus  writes: — Let  the  Elders 
that  rule  well,  be  counted  worthy  of  double  honor, 
especially  those  that  labor  in  the  word  and  doctrine. 
Which  words  appear  to  me  to  signify,  that  there  wTere 
then  some  Elders  who  taught  and  preached  the  word 
of  God,  and  another  class  of  Elders  who  did  not  teach, 
but  only  ruled  in  the  Church.  Concerning  these,  Am- 
brose speaks,  when  he  expounds  this  passage  in 
Timothy.  Nay,  he  inquires  whether  it  was  owing  to 
the  pride  or  the  sloth  of  the  sacerdotal  order  that  they 
had  then  almost  ceased  in  the  Church."* 

The  celebrated  John  A  Lasco,  a  devoted  and 
eminently  useful  Reformer,  is  also  a  decisive  witness  on 
the  same  side.  A  Lasco  was  a  Polish  nobleman,  of 
excellent  education,  and.  great  learning.  He  was  offer- 
ed two  Bishoprics,  one  in  Poland,  and  another  in 
Hungary:  but  he  forsook  his  native  country,  and  all 
the  secular  and  ecclesiastical  honors  which  awaited 
him,  from  love  to  the  reformed  religion.     In  his  youth 

*  P,  Mvrtyris  L,oci  Communes.  Class,  iv.  Cap.  1.  Spct.  9. 


124  TESTIMONY  OF 

he  enjoyed  the  special  friendship  of  Erasmus,  who* 
speaks  of  him  in  one  of  his  letters,  (Erasmi  Epist.  Lib, 
28.  Ep.  3,)  as  a  man  of  uncommon  excellence  and 
worth.  The  Protestant  Churches  in  the  Low  Coun- 
tries being  scattered  in  consequence  of  the  agitation 
produced  by  the  celebrated  ordinance,  called  the  In- 
terim, published  by  Charles  V.,  A  Lasco  was  invited 
to  England,  by  King  Edward  VI.,  at  the  instance  of 
Archbishop  Cranmer.  He  accepted  the  invitation,  and 
was  chosen  Superintendent  of  the  German,  French 
and  Italian  congregations  erected  in  London,  which 
are  said  to  have  consisted,  in  the  aggregate,  of  more 
than  three  thousand,  souls.  He  afterwards  published 
an  account  of  the  form  of  government  and  worship 
adopted  in  those  congregations.  The  affairs  of  each,  it 
is  distinctly  stated  in  that  account,  were  managed  by  a 
Pastor,  Ruling-  Elders,  and  Deacons,  and  each  of  these 
classes  of  officers  was  considered  as  of  divine  appoint- 
meni.  We  also  learn,  from  his  statement,  that  the  Ru- 
ling Elders  and  Deacons  of  these  Churches,  as  well  as 
the  Pastors,  were  ordained  by  the  imposition  of  hands. 
He  further  informs  us,  that,  in  the  administration  of 
the  Lord's  Supper,  in  the  Churches  under  his  superin- 
tendency,  the  communicants  sat  at  the  table;  and  he 
occupies  a  number  of  pages  in  showing  that  this  posture 
ought  to  be  preferred  to  kneeling.  In  short,  he  de- 
clares ''We  have  laid  aside  all  the  relics  of  Popery, 

*  It  is  worthy  of  notice  hero  that  although  a  Superintendent 
was  regarded  by  A  Lasco  as  one  who  had  the  inspection  ot 
several  congregations;  yet  "he  was  greater  than  his  brethren 
only  in  respect  of  his  greater  trouble  and  care,  not  having  more 
authority  than  the  other  Elders,  either  as  to  the  Ministry  of  the 
word  and  scrarnents,  or  as  to  the  exercise  of  ecclesiastical  dis- 
dipline,  to  which  he  was  subject  equally  with  the,  rest." 


TUB    REFORMERS.  125 

with  its  mummeries,  and  we  have  studied  the  greatest 
possible  simplicity  in  ceremonies." 

Notwithstanding  the  publication  of  these  sentiments, 
and  the  establishment  of  these  practices,  marking  so 
great  a  non-conformity  with  the  Church  of  England, 
A  Lasco  was  highly  esteemed,  and  warmly  patronized, 
by  Archbishop  Cranmer,  and  also  by  the  King,  who 
granted  him  Letters  Patent,  constituting  him  and  the 
other  ministers  of  the  foreign  congregations,  a  body 
corporate,  and  giving  them  important  privileges  and 
powers.  These  letters  may  be  seen  among  the  Original 
Records  subjoined  to  Burnet's  History  of  the  Refor- 
mation, ii.  202.  The  following  remarks  by  .4  Lasco 
himself,  will  serve  at  once  to  explain  the  design  of  the 
King  in  granting  his  royal  sanction  to  these  people,  and 
also  his  own  view  of  the  principles  upon  which  he  and 
his  brethren  acted  in  founding  the  Churches  in  ques- 
tion. 

"When  I  was  called  by  the  king,  and  when  certain 
laws  of  the  country  stood  in  the  way,  so  that  the  public 
rites  of  divine  worship  used  under  the  Papacy,  could  not 
be  immediately  purged  out,  (which  the  king  himself 
greatly  desired,)  and  when  I  was  anxious  and  earnest 
in  my  solicitations  for  the  foreign  Churches,  it  was,  at 
length,  his  pleasure,  that  the  public  rites  of  the  English 
Churches  should  be  reformed  by  degrees,  as  far  as  could 
be  accomplished  by  the  laws  of  the  country;  but  that 
strangers,  who  were  not  strictly  and  to  the  same  extent 
bound  by  these  laws,  should  have  Churches  granted  to 
them,  in  which  they  should  freely  regulate  all  things, 

WHOLLY     ACCORDING     TO    APOSTOLICAL     DOCTRINE 

and  practice,  without  any  regard  to  the  rites  of  the 
country ;  that  by  this  means  the  English  Churches 

l  2 


126  TESTIMONY   O^ 

also  might  be  excited  to  embrace  apostolical  purity, 
by  the  unanimous  consent  of  all  the  estates  of  the  king- 
dom. Of  this  project,  the  king  himself  from  his  great 
piety,  was  both  the  chief  author  and  the  defender.  For 
although  it  was  almost  universally  acceptable  to  the 
King's  Council,  and  the  Archbishop  of  Canterbury 
promoted  it  with  all  his  might,  there  were  not  wanting 
some,  who  took  it  ill,  and  would  have  opposed  it,  had  not 
his  majesty  checked  them  by  his  authority,  aiid  by  the 
reasons  which  he  adduced  in  favorof  the  design."  Agaiiv 
in  the  Appendix  to  the  same  book,  p.  649,  he  says : — 
•l  The  care  of  our  Church  was  committed  to  us  chiefly 
with  this  view,  that  in  the  ministration  thereof  we  should 
follow  the  rules  of  the  Divine  Word,  and  apostolical 
observance,  rather  than  any  rites  of  other  Churches. 
In  fine,  we  were  admonished,  both  by  the  king  himself,, 
and  his  chief  nobility,  to  use  this  great  liberty  granted  to 
us  in  our  ministry,  rightly  and  faithfully;  not  to  please 
men,  but  for  the  glory  of  God,  by  promoting  the  refor- 
mation of  his  worship/'* 

On  the  whole,  we  have  in  this  case  a  witness  as 
unexceptionable  and  weighty  as  can  well  be  desired.  A 
man  of  eminent  learning,  piety  and  devotedness.  A  man 
formed,  not  in  the  school  of  Calvin,  but  of  Zuingle. 
A  man  who,  when  the  transactions  and  publications 
above  alluded  to,  occurred,  lived  in  England,  where 
Ruling  Elders  were  unknown :  and  who,  yet,  in  these 
circumstances,  declared  himself  in  favor  of  this  class  of 

*  See  M'Crie's  L'fe  of  Knox,  Vol.  i.  p.  392—396.  See 
also,  Gisberti  Voetii  Politico*  Ecclesiaslisce.  Tom.  i.  420 — 
422.  See  also,  Forma  el  Ratio  totius  Ecclesiastici  Ministerii 
Ed  yard  i  sexti  in  Peregrinorum,  maxime  Germanorum  Ec- 
ctes.  Also,  De  Ordinalione  Ecclesiarum  Peregrinarum  in 
Anglia.     Epist.  Dedicat,  et  p.  649. 


THE  REFORMERS.  127 

officers,  as  of  Divine  appointment,  and  as  important 
to  the  purity  and  edification  of  the  Church. 

But  there  is  a  still  more  conclusive  fact  in  reference  to 
this  stage  of  the  Reformation  in  England.    A  Lasco> 
it  will  be  observed,  asserts,  that  both  king  Edward, 
and  Archbishop  Cranmer,  were  strongly  favorable  to 
the  plan  of  discipline  which  he  and  others  had  introduced 
into  the  Churches  of  Foreign  Protestants  in  England, 
In  confirmation  of  this  statement,  there  is  evidence  that 
Cranmer,  and  the  rest  of  the  Commissioners,  in  Ed- 
ward's reign,  did  directly  propose  the  introduction  of 
Ruling  Elders  in  the  national  Church.     They  drew 
up  a  body  of  laws,  which,  though  not  finally  ratified, 
partly  on  account  of  opposing  influence,  and  partly  from 
the  premature  decease  of  the  monarch ;  yet  clearly  show 
the  opinion  and  wishes  of  Cranmer  and  his  associates. 
One  of  the  proposed  laws  is  as  follows: — "After  evening 
prayers,  on  which  all  shall  attend  in  their  own  parish 
Churches,  the  principal  minister  or  Parson,  and  the 
Deacon,  if  they  are  present:  or,  in  case  of  their  absence, 
the  Curate  and  the  Elders,  shall  consider  how  the 
money  given  for  pious  uses  had  best  be  laid  out;  and 
then  let  discipline  be  exercised.     For  those  whose  sin 
has  been  public,  and  given  offence  to  the  whole  Church, 
should  be  brought  to  a  sense  of  it,  and  publicly  undergo 
the  punishment  of  it,  that  so  the  Church  may  be  the 
better  for  their  correction.     After  that  the  minister  shall 
withdraw,  wilh  some  of  the  Elders,  and  consult  how 
all  other  persons  who  are  disorderly  in  their  life  and 
conversation  may  be  conversed  with ;  first  by  some  sober 
and  good  men  in  a  brotherly  manner  according  to  the 
direction  of  Christ  in  the  Gospel;  and  if  they  hearken 
to  their  advice,  God  is  to  be  praised  for  it;  but  if  they 
go  on  in  their  wickedness,  they  are  to  be  restrained 


128  TESTIMONY  OP 

by  that  severe  punishment,  which  is   in  the  Gospel 
prescribed  for  such  obstinacy."* 

The  testimony  of  Calvin  will  next  be  introduced. 
As  he  is  charged  with  being  the  inventor  of  this  class 
of  officers,  the  weight  of  his  opinion  as  a  witness  in  its 
favor,  will  probably  be  deemed  small  by  its  opposers. 
But  there  is  one  point  of  view  in  which  his  testimony 
will  surely  be  regarded  with  deep  respect,  and,  may  I 
not  add,  as  decisive?     That  he  was  a  man  of  mature 
and   profound  learning,  no  one  can   doubt.     Joseph 
Scaliger,  himself  a  prodigy  of  erudition,  pronounced 
him  to  have  been  the  most  learned  man  in  Europe  in 
his  day;  and,  particularly,  "that  no  man  understood 
ecclesiastical  history  so  well."     Now,  it  is  certain  that 
Calvin  did  not  consider  the  office  of  Ruling  Elder  as 
originating  with  himself;  but  that  he  regarded  it  as 
an  apostolical  institution;  that  he  refers  to  Scripture 
for  its  support;  and  that  he  quotes  Ambrose,  (whose 
testimony  has  been  so  often  referred  to,)  as  an  unques- 
tionable witness  for  the  existence  of  the  office  under 
consideration  in  the  primitive  Church.     The  following 
extracts  from  his  Commentary  and  his  Institutions,  will 
fully  establish  what  is  here  asserted. 

In  his  exposition  of  1  Tim.  v.  17,  he  speaks  thus . 
"From  this  passage  we  may  gather  that  there  were 
then  txco  kinds  of  Presbyters,  because  they  were  not 
all  ordained  to  the  work  of  teaching.  For  the  words 
plainly  mean  that  some  ruled  well,  to  whom  no  part 
of  the  public  instruction  was  committed.     And  verily 

*  Peirce's  Vindication  of  the  Dissenters,  p.  23.  Baxter's 
Treatise  of  Episcopacy,  part.  ii.  p.  112.  Reformatio  Legum 
Ecclesiasticarum,  ex  authoritate  Regis,  Hen.  viii.  et.  Edv.  ri. 
4to.  1640. 


THE  REFORMERS.  129 

there  were  chosen  from  among  tne  people,  grave  and 
approved  men,  who,  in  common  council,  and  joint  au- 
thority with  the  Pastors,  administered  the  discipline  of 
the  (Jhurch,  and  acted  the  part  of  censors  for  the  cor- 
rection of  morals.  This  practice  Ambrose  complains, 
had  fallen  into  disuse,  through  the  idolence,  or  rather 
the  pride  of  the  teaching  ciders,  who  wished  alone  to 
be  distinguished." 

In  his  Institutions^  (Book  iv.  Chapter  iii.,)  he  has 
the  following  passage,  equally  explicit.     u  In  calling 
those  who  preside  over  Churches  by  the  appellations  of 
"Bishops,"  "Elders,"  and  "Pastors,"  without  any  dis- 
tinction, I  have  followed  the  usage  of  the  Scriptures, 
which  apply  all  these  terms  to  express  the  same  mean 
ing.     For  to  all  who  discharge  the  ministry  of  the 
word,  they  give  the  title  of  "Bishops."     So  when  Paul 
enjoins  Titus  to  "ordain  Elders  in  every  city,"  he  im- 
mediately  adds,   "For  a  Bishop  must  be  blameless." 
So,  in  another  place,  he  salutes  more  Bishops  than  one 
in  one  Church.     And  in  the  Acts  of  the  Apostles,  he 
is  declared  to  have  sent  for  the  Elders  of  the  Church 
of  Uphcsus,  whom,  in  his  address  to  them,  he  calls 
"Bishops."     Here  it  must  be  observed,  that  we  have 
enumerated  only  those  offices  which  consist  in  the  mi- 
nistry of  the  word ;  nor  does  Paul  mention  any  other 
in  the  fourth  chapter  of  the  Epistle  to  the  Ephesians 
which  we  have  quoted.     But  in  the  Epistle  to  the  Ro- 
mans, and  the  first  Epistle  to  the  Corinthians,  he  enu- 
merates others,  as  "powers,"  "gifts  of  healing,"  'inter- 
pretation of  tongues,"    "governments,"   "care  of  the 
poor."     Those  functions  which  are  merely  temporary, 
I  omit,  as  foreign  to  our  present  subject.     But  there  aro 
two  which  perpetually  remain,    "governments,"  and 
'••the  care  of  the  poor."     "Governors,"  I  apprehend  to 


130  TESTIMONY   OP 

have  been  persons  of  advanced  years,  selected  from  the 
people,  to  unite  with  the  Bishops  in  giving  admonitions, 
and  exercising  discipline.  For  no  other  interpretation 
can  be  given  of  that  injunction,  "He  that  rnleth,  let 
him  do  it  with  diligence."  For  from  the  beginning, 
every  Church  has  had  its  senate,  or  council  composed 
of  pious,  grave,  and  holy  men,  who  were  invested  with 
that  jurisdiction,  for  the  correction  of  vices,  of  which  we 
ehall  soon  treat.  Now,  that  this  was  not  the  regulation 
of  a  single  age,  experience  itself  demonstrates.  This 
office  of  government  is  necessary,  therefore,  in  every 
age." 

1  ask.  was  Calvin,  honest,  or  dishonest,  in  these  de- 
clarations? If  he  had  invented  and  introduced  the  office 
himself,  could  he  have  been  ignorant  of  the  fact?  And 
whether  it  was  so  or  not,  who  may  reasonably  be  con- 
sidered as  best  able  to  judge — himself,  or  those  who 
live  nearly  three  hundred  years  after  him?  And  who 
would  be  most  likely  to  know  whether  it  were  of  an- 
cient or  modern  origin; — the  most  learned  man  then, 
perhaps,  in  the  world; — or  men  with  not  a  tenth  pari 
of  his  erudition,  at  the  present  day?  The  truth  is,  these 
passages,  considered  in  connexion  with  that  quoted  in  a 
former  chapter,  in  which  he  speaks  of  himself,  in  refer- 
ence to  this  office,  as  following  the  example  of  the 
pious  Witnesses  of  the  truth  who  preceded  him ; — prove, 
either,  that  Calvin  did  not  consider  himself  as  the  in- 
ventor of  the  office,  but  believed  that  it  had  been  in  the 
Church  in  all  ages; — or  that  he  was  gratuitously  and 
profligately  regardless  of  the  truth  to  a  degree  never 
laid  to  his  charge. 

Nor  is  the  testimony  to  the  primitive  existence  of  the 
class  of  officers,  confined  to  those  of  the  Reformers  who 
were  favorable  to  their  continuance  in  the  Church, 


THE   REFORMERS.  131 

Some,  by  no  means  friendly  to  their  restoration,  were 
yet  constrained  to  acknowledge  their  early  origin. 

That   there  were   Ruling  Elders  in  the  primitive 
Church,  is  explicitly  granted  by  Archbishop  Whi/gift, 
a   warm  and  learned  friend  of  diocesan  Episcopacy, 
'•I  know,"  says  he,  "that  in  the  Primitive  Church, 
they  had  in  every  Church  certain  Seniors,  to  whom 
the  government  of  the  Congregation  was  committed; 
but  that  was  before  there  was  any  Christian  Prince  or 
Magistrate  that  openly  professed  the  Gospel;  and  before 
there  was  any  Church  by  public  authority  established." 
And  again: — "Both  the  name  and  office  of  Seniors 
were  extinguished  before  Ambrose's  time,  as  he  himself 
doth  testify,  writing  upon  the  fifth  of  the  first  Epistle  to 
Timothy.    Indeed,  as  Ambrose  saith,  the  Synagogue, 
and  afterwards  the  Church,  had  Seniors,  without  whose 
counsel  nothing  was  done  in  the  Church ;  but  that  was 
before  his  time,  and  before  there  was  any  Christian 
Magistrate,  or  any  Church  established."*     The  learned 
and  acute  Archbishop,  it  seems,  was  not  only  convinced 
that  there  was  Ruling  Elders,  distinct  from  Preach- 
ing Elders,  in  the  Primitive  Church,  but  with  all  his 
erudition  and  discernment,  he  understood  Ambrose  just 
as  the  friends  of  this  class  of  officers  now  understand 
him. 

There  is  another  testimony  on  this  subject,  from  one 
of  the  most  conspicious  and  active  friends  of  the  Re- 
formation in  England,  which  is  worthy  of  particular 
notice.  I  refer  to  that  of  the  Rev.  Dean  Nowell,  who 
flourished  in  the  reign  of  Queen  Elizabeth,  and  whose 
celebrated  Catechism,  drawn  up  in  1562,  obtained, 
perhaps  as  much  currency  and  respect  as  any  publica- 

Defence  against  Carlwright,  p.  638,  651. 


132  TESTIMONY  OF* 

fcion  of  that  period.  Nor  are  we  to  consider  it  as  ex- 
pressing the  sentiments  of  the  illustrious  divine  whose 
name  it  bears,  alone;  for  it  was  unanimously  approved 
and  sanctioned  by  the  same  lower  house  of  Convocation 
which  passed  the  39  Articles  of  the  Church  of  England* 
and  directed  to  be  published  and  used  as  containing 
the  true  doctrine  of  that  Church.  In  this  Chatechism, 
toward  the  close,  when  speaking  of  the  evils  of  retaining 
unworthy  members  in  the  Church,  the  following  ques- 
tions and  answers  occur: — 

"Q,.   What  remedy  for  this  evil  can  be  devised  and 
applied  ?" 

"A.  In  Churches  well  constituted  and  governed,  there 
was,  as  I  before  said,  a  certain  plan  and  order  of  govern- 
ment appointed  and  observed.     Elders  were  chosen, 
that  is,  ecclesiastical  riders,  who  conducted  and  main- 
tained the  discipline  of  the  Church.     To  these  pertained 
authority,  reproof  and  chastisement;  and  the)',  with  the 
concurrence  of  the  Pastor,  if  they  knew  any  who,  by 
false  opinions,  troublesome  errors,  foolish  superstitions. 
or  vicious,  and  profligate  lives,  were  likely  to  bring  a 
great  public  scandal  on  the  Church  of  God,  and  who 
could  not  approach  the  Lord's  Supper  without  a  mani- 
fest profanation,  repelled  them  from  the  communion, 
and  no  more  admitted  them  until,  by  public  penitence, 
they  gave  satisfaction  to  the  Church." 

"  Q.  What  is  to  be  done?''"  (when  those  who  have 
been  excluded  from  the  Church,  repent,  and  desire  to 
be  restored  to  its  communion.) 

"A.  That  they  may  be  received  again  into  the 
Church,  and  to  the  enjoyment  of  its  holy  mysteries, 
from  which  they  have  been  deservedly  cast  out,  they 
ought  humbly  to  supplicate  and  pray.  And,  on  the 
whole,  there  ought  to  be  such  moderation  used  in  ad- 


THE   REFORMERS.  133 

ministering  public  penance,  that  neither  by  too  much 
severity  the  offender  may  be  reduced  to  despondency ; 
nor  by  too  much  lenity,  the  discipline  of  the  Church 
relaxed,  its  authority  diminished)  and  others  encouraged 
and  incited  to  similar  offences.  But  when,  in  the 
judgment  of  the  Elders  and  of  the  Pastor ;  proper 
satisfaction  shall  be  made,  by  the  chastisement  of  the 
offender,  for  an  example  to  others,  he  may  be  admitted 
again  to  the  communion  of  the  Church."* 

Nothing  can  be  more  unequivocal  or  decisive  than 
this  testimony.  In  the  opinion  not  only  of  the  writer 
of  the  Catechism  before  us,  but  also  of  the  leading 
clergy  of  the  Church  of  England,  who  sanctioned  it. 
and  enjoined  its  general  use,  there  ought  to  be,  in  every 
Church,  besides  the  Pastor,  a  bench  of  Elders,  or 
ecclesiastical  Rulers,  whose  duty  it  should  be  to  preside 
over  the  discipline,  and,  in  conjunction  with  the  Pastor, 
to  receive,  admonish,  suspend,  excommunicate,  and  re- 
store members, — in  a  manner  precisely  agreeable  to  the 
well  known  practice  of  the  Presbyterian  Church.  In 
truth,  Dr.  Noivell  could  scarcely  have  expressed  in  more 
distinct  and  unqualified  terms  his  approbation  of  this 
part  of  our  system,  than  in  telling  us,  what,  in  his 
judgment,  and  that  of  his  brethren,  every  well  regulated 
Church  ought  to  have. 

Ur  sinus,  a  learned  German  divine,  contemporary 
with  Luther  and  Melancthon,  speaks  a  language  still 
moietoour  purpose.  "Ministers,"  says  he,  "are  either 
immediately  called  of  God,  or  mediately,  through  the 
instrumentality  of  the  Church.  Of  the  former  class, 
were  Prophets  and  Apostles.     Of  the  latter  class  there 


*  See  Bishop  Randolph's  Enchiridion  Theologicum.     Vol.  i. 
326,-327.  Third  Edition. 

M 


134  TESTIMONY  OP 

are  five  kinds,  viz :  Evangelists,  Bishops,  or  Pastors • 
Teachers,  Ruling  Elders,  and  Deacons.  Evan- 
gelists  are  ministers  appointed  to  go  forth  and  preach 
the  gospel  to  a  number  of  Churches.  Bishops,  are 
ministers  ordained  to  preach  the  word  of  God,  and 
administer  the  sacraments,  in  particular  Churches, 
Teachers  are  ministers  appointed  merely  to  fulfil  the 
function  of  teaching  in  particular  Churches.  Ruling 
Elders  are  ministers  elected  by  the  voice  of  the  Church, 
to  assist  in  conducting  discipline,  and  to  order  a  variety 
of  necessary  matters  in  the  Church.  Deacons  are 
ministers  elected  by  the  Church,  to  take  care  of  the 
poor,  and  distribute  alms"* 

In  the  Confession  of  Saxony,  drawn  up  by  Me- 
lancthon,  in  1551,  and  subscribed  by  a  large  number 
of  Lutheran  divines  and  Churches,  we  find  this  class 
of  officers  recognized,  and  represented  as  in  use  in  those 
Churches.  Speaking  of  the  exercise  of  discipline,  in 
its  various  branches,  they  say: — "That  these  things 
may  be  done  orderly,  there  be  also  Consistories  ap- 
pointed in  our  Churches."  Of  these  Consistories,  a 
majority  of  members,  it  is  well  known,  were  Ruling 
Elders. 

Szegeden,  a  very  eminent  Lutheran  divine,  of 
Hungary,  contemporary  wTith  Luther,  also  speaks  very 
decisively  of  the  apostolic  institution  of  Ruling  Elders. 
The  following  passage  is  sufficient  to  exhibit  his  sen- 
timents. "The  ancient  Church  had  Presbyters,  or 
Elders,  of  which  the  Apostle  speaks,  1  Corinth.  5.  4- 
And  these  Elders  were  of  two  kinds.  One  class  of  them, 
preached  the  gospel,  administered  the  sacraments,  and 
governed  the  Church,  the  same  as  Bishops;  for  Bishops 

*  Ursini  Corpus  Doclrince.  Par.  iii.  p.  721. 


THE    REFORMERS.  135 

and  Presbyters  are  the  same  order.  But  another  class 
of  Elders  consisted  of  grave  and  upright  men,  taken 
from  among  the  laity,  who,  together  with  the  preach- 
ing Elders  before  mentioned,  consulted  respecting  the 
affairs  of  the  Church,  and  devoted  their  labor  to  ad- 
monishing, correcting,  and  taking  care  of  the  flock  of 
Christ."* 

The  Magdeburgh  Centuriators,  who  were  emi- 
nently learned  Lutheran  divines,  contemporary  with 
Melancthon,  and  who  have  been  regarded,  for  three 
hundred  years,  as  among  the  highest  authorities  on 
questions  of  ecclesiastical  history,  speak  in  the  following 
decisive  terms  with  regard  to  the  office  in  question. 
And  although  the  extract  has  been  given  in  a  former 
page;  yet,  as  it  is  brief  and  pointed,  it  may  not  be  im- 
proper to  assign  it  a  place  in  this  connexion.  Speaking 
of  the  third  century,  they  say: — "The  right  of  deciding 
respecting  such  as  were  to  be  excommunicated,  or  of 
receiving,  upon  their  repentance,  such  as  had  fallen,  was 
vested  in  the  Elders  of  the  Church.'1} 

The  learned  Francis  Junius,  a  distinguished  divine 
and  professor  of  Theology  of  the  Church  of  Holland, 
who  lived  at  the  commencement  of  the  Reformation  in 
that  country,  and  was,  of  course,  contemporary  with 
Martyr,  Bucer,  Melancthon,  &c,  wrote  very  fully  and 
explicitly  in  favor  of  the  office  of  Ruling  Elder.  In 
his  work  entitled  Ecclesiastici,  he  decisively,  and  with 
great  learning,  maintains,  that  Pastors,  Ruling  Elders 
and  Deacons,  are  the  only  three  spiritual  orders  of 
Church  Officers;   that   Pastors,  or   ministers   of  the 

*  Szegedeni  Loci  Communes,  p.  197.  Edit,  quint,  folio — ■ 
Basil,  1608. 

f  Cent.  iii.  cap.  vii.  p.  151, 


136  TESTIMONY  OF 

word  and  sacraments,  are  the  highest  order,  and,  of 
course,  are  invested  with  the  power  of  ordaining;  that 
the  second  class,  are  men  of  distinguished  piety  and 
prudence,  chosen  from  among  the  members  of  the 
Church,  to  assist  the  Pastor  in  the  government  of  the 
Church;  and  that  the  Deacons  are  appointed  to  collect 
and  distribute  the  alms  of  the  Church.  He  affirms 
that  these  three  orders  are  set  forth  in  Scripture,  and 
existed  in  the  primitive  Church :  and  that  the  disuse 
of  Ruling  Elders,  as  well  as  the  introduction  of  Prelacy, 
is  a  departure  from  the  primitive  model* 

The  Protestant  Churches  of  Hungary  and  Tran- 
sylvania, although,  in  organizing  their  Churches,  they 
did  not  actually  adopt  and  introduce  the  office  of  Riding- 
Elder  ;  yet  in  the  Preface,  and  other  statements, 
published  with  their  ecclesiastical  Formularies,  they 
spoke,  in  the  most  unequivocal  terms,  both  of  the  value, 
and  the  early  origin  of  this  class  of  officers.  The 
following  extract  may  be  considered  as  a  fair  specimen 
of  their  testimony  on  this  subject.  "Most  other  nations, 
belonging  to  the  Evangelical  Confession,  have  been  in 
the  habit  of  choosing  and  constituting  Elders,  in  every 
village  and  city,  agreeably  to  the  practice  of  the  Old 
Church,  and  also  of  the  Neio  Testament :  men  sound 
in  the  faith,  blameless,  the  husbands  of  one  wife,  having 
faithful  children,  chargeable  with  no  crime,  grave, 
prudent,  &c. — It  is  made  the  official  duty  of  these  men 
dilligently  to  watch  over  the  lives  and  conversation  of 
all  the  members  of  the  Church,  to  rebuke  the  dissolute, 
and,  if  need  be,  to  refer  their  cases  to  the  Pastors  and 
to  the  whole  Eldership,  &c.:'     Here  they  make  a  clear 

*  Ecclesiastic^  sivedenat.  et administrat.  Ecclesice&c.  Lib..  iU 
Cap.  2,  3,4. 


?HE  REFOMERS.  137 

distinction  between  these  Elders  and  the  Pastor s)  of 
the  Churches,  and  represent  the  former  as  assistants 
to  the  latter  in  the  spiritual  concerns  of  the  Church. 
They  then  proceed  to  state  why  a  class  of  officers,  so 
useful,  in  most  cases  so  necessary,  and  which  they  also 
considered  as  having  existed  in  the  apostolic  Church, 
was  not  received  among  them,* 

The  character  of  Jerome  Zanchius,  a  learned  divine 
of  Italy  of  the  sixteenth  century,  who  greatly  distin- 
guished himself  among  the  Reformers,  is  so  well  known, 
that  a  detailed  account  of  his  great  accomplishments 
and  reputation  in  unnecessary.  On  the  subject  before 
us,  bespeaks  thus: — "The  whole  ministry  of  the  Chris- 
tian Church  may  be  divided  into  three  classes.  The 
first  consists  of  those  who  dispense  the  word  and  sacra- 
ments, corresponding  with  those  who,  under  the  Old 
Testament,  were  called  P?'iests  and  Levites;  and  under 
the  New  Testament,  Apostles,  Pastors,  and  Teachers. 
The  second  consists  of  those  whose  peculiar  office  it  is 
to  take  care  of  the  discipline  of  the  Church,  to  inspect 
the  lives  and  conversation  of  all,  and  to  take  care  that 
all  live  in  a  manner  becoming  Christians :  and  also,  if 
at  any  time  there  should  be  a  necessity  for  it,  in  the 
absence  of  the  Pastor,  to  instruct  the  people.  There 
were  such,  under  the  Old  Testament  in  the  Synagogue; 
and  such  also  were  the  Senators  who  were  added  to  the 
Bishop  in  the  administration  of  the  New  Testament 
Church.  These  officers  are  styled  Presbyters,  (Pres- 
byteri,)  and  Elders,  (Senior es,)  of  which  the  Apostle 
speaks,  besides  other  places,  in  1  Timothy  v.  17 ;  Let 
the  Elders  that  rule  tvell  be  counted  worthy  of  double 
honor,  especially  those  who  labor  in  the  word  and 


*  See  G.  Voetii  Polit.  Eccles.  Par.  ii.  Lib.  ii.  Tract,  iii. 

m  2 


138  TESTIMONY  OF 

doctrine.  In  this  passage  the  Apostle  manifestly  speaks 
of  two  sorts  or  classes  of  Elders,  as  he  was  understood 
by  Ambrose  and  others,  among  the  ancients,  and  by 
almost  all  our  modern  Protestant  Divines,  as  Bulling er, 
Peter  Martyr,  &c.,  &c* 

The  most  cursory  reader  of  this  extract  will  not  fail 
to  take  notice,  not  only  that  Zanchius  evidently  ap- 
proved of  this  office,  but  that  he  thought  it  of  Divine 
appointment;  that  he  interpreted  as  we  do  the  famous 
passage  in  Ambrose,  which  the  opposers  of  Ruling 
Elders  have  expended  so  much  ingenuity  in  laboring  to 
explain  away;  and  that  he  considered  almost  all 
the  Reformed  Divines  as  being  of  the  same  opi- 
nion  WITH  HIMSELF. 

The  high  reputation  ofParceus,  a  learned  and  pious 
German  divine,  contemporary  with  Mela?icthon  and 
Zanchius,  is  also  well  known.  His  testimony  respect- 
ing the  office  under  consideration  is  very  explicit.  In  his 
Commentary  on  Romans  xii.  8,  he  observes: — "Here 
the  Apostle  understands  the  function  of  that  class  of 
Elders,  who,  united  with  the  Pastors,  watch  over  and 
correct  the  morals  and  discipline  of  the  Church.  For 
there  were  two  classes  of  Elders,  as  may  be  gathered 
from  1  Timothy  v.  17.  Some  who  labored  in  the 
word  and  doctrine,  who  were  to  be  accounted  worthy 
of  double  honor;  such  as  Teachers,  Pastors,  or 
Bishops;  the  others,  such  as  labored  in  conducting 
discipline,  who  are  here  called  governments."  And 
in  his  Commentary  on  1  Corinthians  xii.  28,  he  says: 
"The  Apostle  here,  undoubtedly,  speaks  of  the  Elders 
who  presided  in  the  administration  of  discipline.     For 


♦Zanchii  Opera.      Tom.  iv.       In  Quartum  Prcecej>tumt 
p.  727. 


THE  REFORMERS.  139 

the  primitive  Church  had  its  Senate,  who  attended  to 
the  morals  of  the  congregation,  while  the  Apostles  and 
Teachers  were  left  at  leisure  to  preach.  Tins  the 
Apostle  indicates  very  clearly  in  the  first  Epistle  to 
Timothy  v.  17,  where  two  classes  of  Presbyters  are 
represented  as  constituted.  The  governments  here 
spoken  of  were  not  of  Princes  or  Praetors,  armed  with 
the  sword,  but  grave,  experienced  men,  exercising 
authority  over  others,  chosen  out  of  the  Church,  by  the 
consent  of  the  Church,  to  assist  the  Pastors  in  con- 
ducting discipline,  and  to  alleviate  their  burdens." 

The  celebrated  Piscator,  who  held  a  distinguished 
place  among  the  divines  who  adorned  Germany,  and 
maintained  the  Protestant  cause,  in  the  sixteenth  cen- 
tury, is  equally  decisive,  as  an  advocate  of  the  office 
under  consideration.  In  his  Commentary  on  1  Tim. 
v.  17,  he  says: — "The  Apostle  distributes  Elders  into 
two  classes — those  who  preside  in  maintaining  eccle- 
siastical discipline,  but  did  not  publicly  teach;  and  those 
who  both  taught,  and  co-operated  in  ruling,  and  were 
therefore  worthy  of  a  great  honor,  and  a  more  liberal 
support  than  the  others." 

Few  ministers  of  the  Church  of  England,  during  the 
reign  of  Glueen  Elizabeth,  were  more  distinguished  for 
talents,  learning  and  piety,  than  Thomas  Cartwright, 
Professor  of  Divinity  in  the  University  of  Cambridge, 
the  opponent  of  the  high  prelatical  claims  of  Archbishop 
Whitgift,  and  concerning  whom  the  celebrated  Bcza 
pronounced,  that  he  thought  "the  sun  did  not  shine 
upon  a  more  learned  man."  This  eminent  divine, 
commenting  on  Matthew  xViii.  17,  Tell  it  unto  the 
Church,  &c,  thus  remarks: — "  Theophylact  upon 
this  place,  interpreteth,  Tell  the  Church,  that  is  many, 
because  this  assembly  taketh  knowledge  of  this  anil 


140  TESTIMONY   OF 

other  things,  by  their  mouths,  that  is,  their  governors* 
Chrysostom  also  saith,  that  to  tell  the  Church  is  to  tell 
the  governors  thereof.  It  is,  therefore,  to  be  understood  ^ 
that  these  governors  of  the  Church,  which  were  set 
over  every  several  assembly  in  the  time  of  the  law,  were 
of  txoo  sorts ;  for  some  had  the  handling  of  the  word ; 
some  other  watching  against  the  offences  of  the  Church, 
did,  by  common  council  with  the  ministers  of  the  word, 
take  order  against  the  same.  Those  governing  Elders 
are  divers  times  in  the  story  of  the  gospel  made  mention 
of,  under  the  title  of  "  Rulers  of  the  Synagogue:7 
And  this  manner  of  government,  because  it  ivas  to  be 
translated  into  the  Church  of  Christ,  under  the 
gospel,  our  Saviour,  by  the  order  at  that  time  used 
among  the  Jews,  declareth  what  after  should  be  done 
in  his  Church.  Agreeably  hereunto  the  Apostle  both 
declared  the  Lord's  ordinance  in  his  behalf,  and  put  the 
same  in  practice,  in  ordaining  to  every  several  Church, 
beside  the  ministry  of  the  word,  certain  of  the 
chiefest  men  vjhich  should  assist  the  work  of  the 
LoroVs  building.  This  was  also  faithfully  practised  of 
the  Churches  after  the  Apostle's  times,  as  long  as  they 
remained  in  any  good  and  allowable  soundness  of  doc- 
trine. And  being  fallen  from  the  Churches,  especially 
from  certain  of  them,  the  want  thereof  is  sharply  and 
bitterly  cast  into  the  teeth  of  the  Church's  teachers, — 
by  whose  ambition  that  came  to  pass."*  And  as  proof 
of  this,  the  author  quotes  in  the  margin  that  very  pas- 
sage of  Ambrose,  cited  in  the  preceding  section,  and 
which  has  always  given  so  much  trouble  to  Prelatists 
and  Independents. 


*Cartwright's  Commentary  on   the   New   Testament — 
Against  the  Rhemists. 


THE    REFORMERS.  141 

The  same  writer,  in  his  Second  Reply  to  Whitgift, 
speaking  of  the  class  of  Elders  under  consideration, 
expresses  himself  thus: — "For  proof  of  those  Church 
Elders,  which,  being  occupied  in  the  government,  had 
nothing  to  do  with  the  Word,  the  testimony  of  Am- 
brose, is  so  clear  and  open,  that  he  which  doth  not  give 
place  unto  it,  must  needs  be  thought  as  a  bat,  or  an 
owl,  or  some  other  night-bird,  to  delight  in  darkness. 
His  saying  is,  that  the  Elders  fell  away  by  the  ambi- 
tion of  the  Doctors;  whereby  opposing  the  Elders  to 
Doctors,  which  taught,  he  plainly  declareth,  that  they 
had  not  to  do  with  the  Word:  whereupon  it  is  mani- 
fest that  it  wras  the  use,  in  the  best  reformed  Churches, 
certain  hundred  years  after  the  times  of  the  Apostles,  to 
have  an  Eldership  which  meddled*  not  icitli  the  icord, 
nor  administration  of  sacraments.* 

The  testimony  of  the  Rev.  Richard  Grcenliam,  a 
divine  of  the  Church  of  England,  who  nourished  in 
the  reign  of  Queen  Elizabeth,  and  who  was  greatly 
revered  both  for  his  learning  and  piety,  is  very  une- 
quivocal and  pointed  on  this  subject.  It  is  in  these 
words: — "The  Apostle  St.  Paul,  doth  notably  amplify 
the  honor  due  to  the  true  and  faithful  minister.  The 
Elders  that  ride  well,  (saith  he,)  let  them  be  had  in 
double  honor,  specially  they  which  labor  in  the  word 
and  doctrine;  1  Timothy  v.  17.  As  if  he  should  say, 
let  those  Elders  which  are  appointed  to  watch  and  look 
to  the  manners  and  behaviour  of  the  children  of  Gcd, 
if  they  execute  this  charge  faithfully,  be  had  in  double 
honor;  but  above  all,  let  the  faithful  ministers,  such  as 
labor  in  the  word,  be  honored :  for  why  ?  the  other  are 
overseers  of  your  outward  behaviour,  but  these  have 
..I, 

*  Second  Reply.     Part  Second,  p.  44.  4to.  1577. 


142  TESTIMONY  OP 

another  manner  of  office;  they  watch  over  your  souls 
which  tendeth  to  the  salvation  both  of  body  and  soul." 
And  again: — " The  rulers  of  the  Church  are  called  the 
Church,  to  whom  discipline  appertained.  Not  the 
whole  company  of  the  Jews,  but  the  Rulers  of  the 
Synagogue,  are  called  the  Church  of  the  Jews.* 

The  celebrated  Estius,  the  learned  Popish  expositor 
and  Professor  at  Douay,  in  his  Commentary  on  1  Tim. 
v.  17,  delivers  the  following  opinion: — From  this  pas- 
cage  it  may  manifestly  be  gathered  that,  in  the  time  of 
the  Apostles,  there  were  certain  Presbyters  in  the 
Church  who  ruled  well,  and  were  worthy  of  double 
honor,  and  who  yet  did  not  labor  in  the  word  and  doc- 
trine; neither  do  the  heretics  of  the  present  day  (mean- 
ing the  Protestants)  deny  this."  And,  in  speaking  of 
the  establishment  of  this  class  of  Elders  in  Geneva, 
about  half  a  century  before  he  wrote,  he  seems  only  to 
blame  Calvin  for  considering  and  styling  them  laymen. 
He  expresses  a  decisive  opinion,  that  the  Elders  spoken 
of  by  Paul,  in  this  place,  were  ecclesiastical  men,  set 
apart  by  ecclesiastical  rites,  and  devoted  to  eccle- 
siastical duties;  but  they  did  not  preach.  And  he 
explicitly  acknowledges  that  Ambrose,  in  the  fourth 
century,  speaks  of  such  Elders  as  having  existed  long 
before  his  day.  It  is  worthy  of  remark,  that  the  same 
learned  Romanist,  in  another  work,  not  only  avows,  in 
the  most  distinct  manner,  his  belief  in  the  apostolic 
appointment  of  non-preaching  Elders,  and  quotes 
1  Tim.  v.  17,  in  support  of  his  opinion;  but  he  also 
refers  to  Jerome  and  Augustine,  as  witnesses  to  the 
same  fact.t 

The  opinion  of  the  learned  Professor  Whitaker,  a 

»  .i      '     ■  '  — * 

*  Works,  p.  352.  842.  fol.  1612. 
f  Estii  Sententiarum  Commentaria.  Lib.  iv.  Par.  2.  Sect.  21. 


THE  REFORMERS.  143 

divine  of  the  Church  of  England,  who  flourished  in  the 
reign  of  Queen  Elizabeth,  as  to  the  true  meaning  of 
1  Timothy  v.  17,  was  given,  at  length,  in  a  preceding 
page.  The  same  distinguished  divine,  in  writing  against 
Dury,  expresses  himself  thus,  concerning  the  office 
under  consideration.  "Art  thou  so  ignorant  as  not"  to 
know  that  in  the  Church  of  Christ  there  ought  to  be 
•Elders  who  should  devote  themselves  to  the  work  of 
government  alone,  and  not  to  the  administration  of  the 
word  or  sacraments ,sls  we  are  taught  in  1  Tim.  v.  17?"* 

To  these  testimonies  might  be  added  many  more, 
from  learned  men  of  the  same  distinguished  character 
with  those  already  mentioned,  and  to  the  same  effect, 
Chemnitius,  of  Germany;  Salmasius,  of  Holland; 
Marloratus,  and  Danaiiis,  of  France;  Hemmingiusf 
of  Denmark^ — with  a  long  list  of  similar  namesT 
might  all  be  cited  as  warm  advocates  of  the  class  of 
Eiders  under  consideration,  and  almost  all  of  them 
decisive  advocates  of  its  divine  authority. 

Nor  are  these  individual  suffrages,  though  numerous 
and  unequivocal,  all  that  can  be  alleged  in  favor  of  our 
cause.  The  great  body  of  the  Protestant  Churches, 
when  they  came  to  organize  their  several  systems  in  a 
state  of  separation  from  the  Papacy,  and  from  each 
other,  differing,  as  they  did,  in  many  other  respects, 
were  almost  unanimous  in  adopting  and  maintaining 
the  office  of  Ruling  Elder.  Instead  of  this  office  being 
confined,  as  many  appear  to  suppose,  to  the  ecclesiasti- 
cal establishments  of  Geneva  and  Scotland,  it  was 
generally  introduced,  with  the  Reformation,  by  Lu- 

*  Contra  Durceum,  Lib.  ix.  p.  807. 

f  See  these  writers,  as  well  as  a  number  of  others,  referred 
to  in  the  Politico?  Ecclesiastical  of  Voetius.  Par.  ii.  Lib.  ii. 
Tract,  iii. 


144  TESTIMONY  OP 

therans  as  well  as  Calvinists;  and  is  generally  retained 
to  the  present  day,  in  almost  all  the  Protestant  Churches, 
excepting  that  of  England.  Those  of  France,  Ger- 
many, Holland,  Switzerland,  &c,  received  this  class 
of  Elders  early,  and  expressly  represented  them  in  their 
public  Confessions,  as  founded  on  the  word  of  God. 
It  is  probably  safe  to  affirm,  that,  at  the  period  of  the 
Reformation,  more  than  three-fourths  of  the  whole' 
Protestant  world  declared  in  favor  of  this  office,  not 
merely  as  expedienthxxt  aswarrantedby  tScriptu?^e,eaid 
as  necessary  to  the  order  and  edification  of  the  Church. 
Does  all  this,  it  may  be  confidently  §sked.  look  like 
the  office  in  question  being  a  mere  Genevan  innovation? 
How  shall  we  reconcile  with  this  extraordinary  position, 
the  undoubted  fact,  that  Lutherans  and  Reformed,  in 
every  part  of  Europe:  those  who  never  saw  Calvin 
as  well  as  those  who  were  within  the  sphere  of  his  ac- 
quaintance and  influence ;  nay,  some  of  those  who  died 
before  the  illustrious  Reformer  of  Geneva  ever  appeared 
at  all,  either  as  a  writer  or  preacher; — are  found  among 
the  decisive,  zealous  advocates  of  the  office  in  question, 
and  quoting,  as  of  conclusive  authority,  in  its  favor,  the 
principal  passages  of  Scripture,  and  the  principal  Father, 
relied  on  by  Presbyterians  to  establish  its  Apostolical 
warrant,  and  its  actual  existence  in  the  early  ages  of  the 
ancient  Church  ?  Truly,  it  is  difficult  to  conceive  how 
any  one,  who  seriously  and  impartially  weighs  these 
facts,  can  resist  the  impression,  that  an  Institution,  in 
behatf  of  which  so  many  eminently  learned  and  pious 
men,  of  different  and  distant  countries,  without  concert 
with  each  other,  and  without  any  common  interest  to 
serve,  in  reference  to  this  matter,  have  so  remarkably 
concurred  in  opinion,  must  have  some  solid  foundation, 
both  in  the  inspired  volume,  and  in  the  nature  and 
necessities  of  the  Church. 


CHAPTER  VII. 

TESTIMONY  OF    EMINENT    DIVINES   SINCE  THE 
TIME  OF  THE  REFORMERS. 

While  we  justly  attach  so  much  importance  to  the 
persons  and  services  of  the  Reformers,  and  recur  with 
the  deepest  reverence  to  their  opinions,  we  owe  scarcely 
less  respect  to  the  judgment  of  a  number  of  other  men, 
who  have  lived  since  their  time;  and  of  whom  the 
world  xoas  not  worthy.  Men  whose  testimony  can 
never  be  quoted  but  with  veneration,  and  whose  charac- 
ters give  an  ample  pledge  of  research  at  once  profound 
and  honest.  To  the  decision  of  a  few  of  these  illustrious 
men  on  the  subject  before  us,  the  attention  of  the  reader 
is  respectfully  requested. 

The  decisive  opinion  of  Dr.  Owen,  undoubtedly  one 
of  the  greatest  divines  that  ever  adorned  the  British 
nation,  in  favor  of  the  scriptural  warrant  of  the  office 
of  Ruling  Elder,  was  given  in  a  preceding  section,  and 
need  not  now  be  repeated.  I  may,  however,  add,  that 
the  more  weight  ought  to  be  attached  to  this  opinion 
on  account  of  Dr.  Owen's  ecclesiastical  connexions, 
which,  as  is  well  known,  were  by  no  means  adapted  to 
give  him  a  bias  on  the  side  of  Presbyterian  order. 

The  venerable  and  eminently  pious  Richard  Bax- 
ter, was  no  Presbyterian.  Yet  he  expresses  himself  in 
the  following  very  unequivocal  language,  orl  the  subject 

N 


146  TESTIMONY  Of 

under  consideration.  When  I  plead,  that  the  order  of 
subject  Presbyters,  (or  lay-Elders,)  was  not  instituted 
jn  Scripture  times,  and  consequently  that  it  is  not  of 
divine  institution,  I  mean,  that,  as  a  distinct  office,  or 
species  of  Church  ministers,  it  is  not  a  divine  institution, 
nor,  a  lawful  institution  of  man;  but  that,  among  men 
in  the  same  office,  some  might,  prudentially ',  be  chosen 
to  an  eminency  of  degree,  as  to  the  exercise;  and  that 
according  to  the  difference  of  their  advantages,  there 
might  be  a  disparity  in  the  use  of  their  authority  and 
gifts,  I  think  was  done  in  Scripture  times,  and  might 
have  been  after,  if  it  had  not  then.  And  my  judgment 
is,  that,  ordinarily,  every  particular  Church  (such  as 
our  parish  Churches  are)  had  more  Elders  than  one, 
but  not  such  store  of  men  of  eminent  gifts,  as  that  all 
these  Elders  could  be  such.  But  as  if  half  a  dozen  of 
the  most  judicious  persons  of  this  parish  were  ordained 
to  be  Elders,  of  the  same  office  with  myself;  but  be- 
cause they  are  not  equally  fit  for  public  preaching,  should 
most  employ  themselves  in  the  rest  of  the  oversight, 
consenting  that  the  public  preaching  lie  most  upon  me, 
and  that  I  be  the  moderator  of  them,  for  order  in  cir- 
cumstantials. This  I  think  was  the  true  Episcopacy 
and  Presbytery  of  the  first  times."* 

Although  it  may  be  doubted  whether  this  venerable 
man  be  correct  in  his  whole  view  of  this  subject ;  yet  it 
will  be  observed  by  every  attentive  reader,  that  in  main- 
taining the  existence  of  a  plurality  of  Elders  in  each 
Church,  in  primitive  times,  and  that  a  great  part  of  these 
Elders  were  not,  in  fact,  employed  in  preaching,  but 
in  inspecting  and  ruling,  he  concedes  every  thing  that 

*  Disputations  of  Church  government. — Advertisement,  p. 
4,  5,  4to.  1659. 


LATER  DIVINES.  147 

can  be  deemed  essential  in  relation  to  the  office  which 
we  are  considering. 

The  Puritan  Congregationalists  of  England, 
about  the  year  1605,  in  the  summary  of  their  Faith 
and  Order,  entitled,  English  Puritanism,  drawn  up 
by  the  venerable  Mr.  Bradshaw,  translated  into  Latin 
for  the  benefit  of  the  foreign  Protestants,  by  the  learned 
Dr.  Ames,  and  intended  to  express  the  sense  of  the 
general  body  of  the  Puritans,  speak  thus  on  the  subject 
of  Ruling  Elders. 

"  Since  even  in  the  best  constituted  Churches,  they 
know  that  not  a  few  enormous  offences  will  arise,  which, 
if  not  timety  met,  will  do  injury  both  to  those  who 
believe,  and  those  who  are  inquiring;  while,  at  the 
same  time,  they  see  that  the  authority  of  a  single  person 
in  a  parish,  resembling  the  papal,  is  contrary  to  the  will 
of  Christ:  they  think,  as  the  case  itself  requires,  and  as 
appointed  of  God,  that  others  also  should  be  selected 
from  the  Church,  as  officers,  who  may  be  associated 
with  the  ministers  in  the  spiritual  government" 

"  These  are  inspectors,  s^m^ra^a  kind  of  censors, 
whose  duty  it  is,  together  with  the  ministers  of  the 
ivord,  as  well  to  watch  over  the  conduct  of  all  the 
brethren,  as  to  judge  between  them.  And  they  think 
that  this  office  is  instituted,  that  each  may  take  the 
more  heed  to  himself  and  his  ways,  while  the  ministers 
enjoy  more  leisure  for  study  and  devotion,  and  obtain, 
through  the  assistance  of  their  co-adjutors,  a  more 
accurate  view  of  the  state  of  the  flock ;  since  it  is  the 
peculiar  duty  of  the  inspectors  to  be  always  watchful 
over  the  manners  and  conduct  of  all  the  members  of 
the  Church." 

"  To  this  office  they  think  that  none  should  be  pre- 
ferred, but  men  very  eminent  for  gravity  and  prudence, 


148  TESTIMONY  OF 

established  in  the  faith ;  of  tried  integrity ;  whose  sano 
tity  of  life  and  upright  example  are  well  known  to  the 
whole  society." 

In  the  choice  of  these  Elders,  respect  should  always 
be  had  to  their  outward  circumstances.  They  should 
be  able  to  support  themselves  in  some  respectable 
manner ;  though  it  will  not  be  an  objection  to  them 
that  they  pursue  some  mechanical  art,  provided  they 
be  morally  qualified."* 

Nor  were  these  venerable  men  the  only  Independents 
who  declared,  in  the  most  decisive  manner,  in  favor  of 
this  class  of  officers.  The  celebrated  Dr.  Thomas 
Goodwin,  one  of  the  Westminster  Assembly  of  di- 
vines, and  who  is  styled  by  Anthony  A.  Wood,  a  very 
'-Atlas  and  Patriarch  of  Independency,"  is  well  known 
to  have  been  one  of  the  most  learned  and  influential 
Independents  of  the  seventeenth  century,  and  one  of 
the  most  voluminous  and  instructive  writers  of  his  class. 
In  his  "  Church  Order  Explained,  in  a  way  of 
Catechism,7'  the  following  passage  occurs: — "What 
sort  of  Bishops  hath  God  set  in  his  Church?"  Answer T 
Two :  some  Pastors  and  Teachers ;  sume  Muling' 
Elders,  under  two  heads ;  some  labor  in  word  and 
doctrine,  and  of  those,  some  are  Pastors,  some  Teach- 
ers ;  others  rule  only,  and  labor  not  in  the  word  and 
doctrine." — Again  \  what  is  the  office  and  work  of  the 
Riding  Elder  1  Answer,  seeing  tire  kingdom  of  God 
is  not  of  this  world,  but  heavenly  and  spiritual,  and  the 
government  of  his  kingdom  is  not  lordly,  but  stewardly 
and  ministerial;  and  to  labor  in  the  ministry  of  exhorta- 
tion and  doctrine  is  the  proper  work  of  the  Pastors  and 
Teachers;  it  remaineth,  therefore,  to  be  the  office  and 

*  Neal's  History  of  the  Puritans,  VoL  i.  p.  4.49.  4Jo.  ?dij. 


LATER  DIVINES.  149 

work  of  the  Ruling  Elders  to  assist  the  Pastors  and 
Teachers  in  diligent  attendance  to  all  other  aids  of  rule 
besides  exhortation  and  doctrine,  as  bccometh  good 
stewards  of  the  household  of  God.  As,  first,  to  open 
and  shut  the  doors  of  God's  house,  by  admission  of 
members,  by  ordination  of  officers,  by  excommunication 
of  notorious  and  obstinate  offenders.  Secondly,  to  see 
that  none  live  in  the  Church  inordinately,  without  a 
calling,  or  idle  in  their  calling.  Thirdly,  to  prevent 
and  heal  offences,  whether  in  life  or  doctrine,  that  might 
corrupt  their  own  Church,  or  other  Churches.  Fourthly  T 
to  prepare  matters  for  the  Church's  consideration, 
and  to  moderate  the  carriage  of  all  matters  in  the 
Church  assemblies.  Finally,  to  feed  the  flock  of  God, 
by  a  word  of  admonition,  and,  as  they  shall  be  called, 
to  visit  and  pray  with  their  sick  brethren.  The  ground 
of  all  this  is  laid  down  in  Romans,  12.  8.  where  the 
Apostle,  besides  him  who  exhorteth  and  teacheth, 
maketh  mention  of  another  officer,  who  ruleth  with 
diligence,  and  is  distinct  from  the  Pastors  and  Teachers, 
and  that  is  the  sum  of  his  work,  to  rule  with  diligence. 
Thus  you  see  the  whole  duty  of  these  Ruling  Elders, 
and  how  they  are  to  assist  the  Pastors  and  Teachers  in 
all  other  acts  of  rule  besides  word  and  doctrine.  Use 
1.  From  hence  observe  the  great  bounty  of  God  unto 
Pastors  and  Teachers,  that  God  hath  not  left  them 
alone  in  the  Church,  as  Martha  complains  to  Christ 
that  Mary  had  left  her  alone  to  serve:  the  ministers  of 
the  Church  have  no  such  cause  to  complain:  for,  as  he 
gave  the  Levites  to  the  Priests,  to  help  them  in  their 
service,  so  hath  he  given  Ruling  Elders  to  such  as 
labor  in  the  word  and  doctrine,  that  they  might  have 
assistance  from  them  in  ruling  the  Church  of  God, 
Use  2.  It  may  serve  to  answer  a  cavil  that  some  have 

n  2 


150  TESTIMONY  OF 

against  this  office,  who  say,  that,  if  God  hath  given 
these  officers  to  the  Church,  he  would  then  have  set 
down  the  limits  of  these  officers,  and  not  have  sent  them 
forth  with  illimited  power.     To  which  it  is  answered, 
that  their  power  is  strongly  limited,  as  a  stewardly 
or  ministerial  power  and  office.     It  is  the  power  of  the 
keys,  which  Christ  hath  expressed  in  his  word,  and  it 
consisteth  in  those  things  that  have  been  spoken  of 
God's  house,  to  open  and  shut  the  doors  of  God's  house, 
by  admission  of  members,  &c.     This  is  such  a  rule  as 
is  no  small  help  to  the  spirits  and  hearts  of  those  who 
labor  in  doctrine;  and  no  small  help  it  is  also  to  the 
whole  Church  of  God ;  and  when  they  are  wanting, 
many  evils  will  grow,  and  those  without  the  possibility 
of  redress  and  amendment,  much  idleness,  much  con- 
fusion, many  offences.     Though  other  ministers  have 
been  in  the  Cliurch,  we  may  see  how  much,  in  the  want 
of  these  officers,  the  Churches  have  been  corrupted."* 
The  character  of  the  Rev.  Thomas  Hooker,  one  of 
the  most  learned  and  pious  Fathers  of  New- England, 
and  a  distinguished  advocate  of  Independency,  is  too 
well  known  to  require  remark.     In  his  work,  entitled 
"A  Survey  of  Church  Discipline,"  &a,  he  speaks  thus 
of  the  office  under  consideration: — "We  begin  with  the 
Ruling  Eldefs  place,  for  that  carries  a  kind  of  sim- 
plicity with  it.     There  be  more  ingredients  required  to 
make  up  the  office  of  Pastor  and  Doctor,  and  therefore 
we  shall  take  leave  to  trade  in  the  first,  quo  simplicius 
ac  priiis.    That  there  is  such  an  office  and  officer  ap- 
pointed by  Christ,  as  the  Scriptures  are  plain  to  him, 
whose  spirit  and  apprehension  is  not  possessed  and  fore- 

*  Church  Order  Explained,  &c,  page  16, 19, 22,  to  be  found 
ia  the  4Jh  Vol.  of  his  Works,  four  vols.  fol.  London,  1697. 


EATER   DIVINES.  15t 

siaiied  with  prejudice.     The  first  argument  we  have 
from  Romans  12.  7,  which  gives  in  witness  to  this 
truth,  where  all  these  officers  are  numbered  and  named 
expressly.     The  second  argument  is  taken  from  1  Cor. 
12.  28.     The  scope  of  the  place,  and  the  Apostle's  in- 
tendment is,  to  lay  open  the  several  offices  and  officers 
that  the  Lord  hath-  set  in  his  Church,  and  so  many 
chief  members,  out  of  which  the  Church  is  constituted 
as  an  entire  body."     And;  after  making  some  other 
remarks  for  the  right  discovery  of  the  Apostle's  proceed- 
ing and  purpose,  he  adds: — "From  which  premises, 
the  dispute  issues  thus.      As  Apostles,  Prophets  and 
Teachers  are  distinct,  so  are  Helps  and  Governments 
distinct:  for  the  Spirit  puts  them  in  the  same  ranks,  as 
having  a  parity  of  leason  which  appertains  to  them  alfc. 
But  they  were  distinct  offices,  and'  found  in  persons  as 
distinct  officers,  as  verse  30 — Are  all  Apostles?     Are 
all  Teachers?     Therefore,  the  same  is  true  of  Gover- 
nors. Athird  argument  is  taken  from  the  famous  place, 
X  Timothy  v.  17,  which  is  full  to  our  purpose  in  hand", 
and  intended  by  the  Holy  Spirit  of  the  Lord,  to  make 
evident  the  station  and-  office- of  Ruling  Elders,  unto 
the  ead  of  the  world."* 

The  praise  of  the  Rev.  John  Cotton,  one  of  the  most 
distinguished  of  the  first  ministers  of  New-E?7gland, 
was  in  all  the  Churches,  in  his  time.  In  a  small  work, 
entitled,  "Questions  and  Answers  on  Church  Govern- 
ment, begun  25th  Nov..  1634,"  the  following  passages 
occur.  u  Quest.  What  sorts  of  ministers  or  officeia 
hath  God  set  in  his  Church?'  Answer.  The  ministers 
and  officers  of  the  Church  are  some  of  them  extra 
ordinary,  as  Apostles,  Prophets,  Evangelists ;  some 

*  Survey,  &c,  part  ii.  p.  6.  &  10.  li1.  4to.  London,  1648. 


152  TESTIMONY  OP 

ordinary,  as  Bishops  and  Deacons.  Quest.  Whut 
sorts  of  Bishops  hath  God  ordained  in  his  Church? 
Answer.  There  are  three  sorts  of  them,  according  as 
there  be  three  sorts  of  Eiders  in  the  Church,  though 
under  two  heads;  some  Pastors,  some  Teachers,  some 
Ruling  Elders.  That  is  to  say,  such  Elders  as  labor  in 
the  word  and  doctrine,  and  such  as  rule  in  the  Church 
of  God;  1  Tim.  i.  13  ;  1  Cor.  12.  28  ;  Rom.  12.  7,  8; 
1  Tim.  5. 17.  Quest.  What  is  the  work  of  a  Ruling 
Elder?  Answer.  Seeing  the  kingdom  of  Christ  is  not 
of  this  world,  but  heavenly  and  spiritual ;  and  the  go- 
vernment of  his  kingdom  is  not  lordly,  but  stewardly 
and  ministerial;  and  to  labor  in  the  administration  of 
exhortation  and  doctrine  is  the  proper  work  of  Pastor 
and  Teacher — it  remains  to  be  the  office  of  the  Ruling 
Elder  to  assist  the  Pastor  and  Teacher  in  all  other  acts 
of  rule  besides,  as  becomes  good  stewards  of  the  house- 
hold of  God.  And,  therefore,  to  put  instances,  as, 
First,  To  open  and  shut  the  doors  of  God's  house,  by 
admission  of  members,  by  ordination  of  officers,  by 
excommunication  of  notorious  and  obstinate  offenders. 
Secondly,  To  see  that  none  live  in  the  Church  in- 
ordinately, without  a  calling,  or  idly  in  their  calling. 
Thirdly,  To  prevent  or  heal  offences.  Fourthly,  To 
prepare  matters  for  the  Church's  consideration,  and  to 
moderate  the  carriage  of  all  things  in  the  Church  assem- 
blies. Fifthly,  To  feed  the  flock  of  God  with  the 
word  of  admonition,  and,  as  they  shall  be  called,  to  visit 
and  pray  over  the  sick  brethren."* 

The  venerable  John  Davenport,  it  is  well  known, 

*  A  Treatise,  1.  Of  Faith.  2.  Twelve  Fundamental  Arti- 
cles of  Christian  Religion.  3.  A  Doctrinal  Conclusion.  4. 
Questions  and  Answers  on  Church  Government. — p.  20,  21. 


LATER   DIVINRTS.  133 

held  a  distinguished  place  among  the  early  lights  of 
the  Massachusetts  and  Connecticut  Churches.  In  a 
treatise  entitled  "The  Power  of  Congregational  Churches 
asserted  and  vindicated,  &c,"  although  his  plan  did  not 
require,  or  even  admit,  that  he  should  treat  expressly 
and  at  length  on  the  officers  of  the  Church;  yet  he 
repeatedly,  and  in  the  most  unequivocal  manner  alludes 
to  the  office  of  Ruling  Elder,  as  belonging  to  the  Church 
by  divine  appointment;  as  altogether  distinct  from  the 
office  of  both  Teaching  Elder  and  Deacon;  and  as 
being  of  indispensible  importance  to  the  edification  of 
the  Church.* 

Nor  are  these  the  sentiments  of  detached  individuals 
merely.     They  were  adopted  and  published,  about  the 
same  time,  by  public  bodies,  in  the  most  solemn  manner. 
In  a  work  entitled,  "Church  Government,  and  Church 
Covenant  discussed,  in  an  answer  of  the  Eiders  of  the 
several  Churches  of  New-England^  to  two  and  thirty 
questions   sent  over  to  them    by  divers   ministers  in 
England^  to  declare  their  judgment  thereon :"     In  this 
treatise,  Ruling  Elders  are  spoken  of,  as  of  divine  in- 
stitution, and  as  actually  existing,  at  the  time,  in  the 
Churches  of  New-Englamd.     The  fifteenth  question 
is: — "-Whether"  do  you  give  the  exercise  of  all  Church 
power  of  government,  to  the  whole  Church,  or  to  the 
Presbyters  thereof  alone?"  To  which  it  is  answered: — 
"  We  do  believe  that  Christ  hath  ordained  that  there 
should  be  a  Presbytery  or  Eldership;  I  Tim.  4.  14; 
and  that  in  every  Church,  Titus  i.  5;  Acts  14.  28; 
ICor.  xi.  28,  whose  work  is  to  teach  and  rule  the 
Church  by  the  word  and  laws  of  Christ,  1  Tim.  5.  17. 

*  The  power  of  Congregational  Churches,  &c.  p.  56.  81.  94, 
Iil5.  12cpo.  London,  1672.. 


154  TESTIMONY  OF 

and  unto  whom,  as  teaching  and  ruling,  all  the  people 
ought  to  be  obedient,  and  submit  themselves;  Heb.  13. 
17.  And,  therefore,  a  government  merely  popular,  or 
democratical,  (which  divines  and  orthodox  writers  do  so 
much  condemn,  in  Morillius,  and  such  like,)  is  far  from 
the  practice  of  these  Churches,  and,  we  believe,  far  from 
the  mind  of  Christ."  The  twenty-third  question  is, 
"What  authority  or  eminency  have  your  preaching 
Elders  above  your  sole  Ruling  Elders;  or  are  they  both 
equal?  Answer.  It  is  not  the  manner  of  Elders  among 
us,  whether  Ruling  only,  or  ruling  and  Teaching 
also,  to  strive  for  authority  or  pre-eminence  one  above 
another. — As  for  the  people's  duty  toward  their  Elders, ' 
it  is  taught  them  plainly  in  that  place,  1  Thess.  5.  12. 
13,  as  also  in  that  of  1  Tim.  5.  17;  and  this  word 
(especially)  shews  them  that,  as  they  are  to  account  all 
their  Elders  worthy  of  double  honor,  so  in  special  man- 
ner their  Teaching  or  Preaching  Elders.'7* 

But  there  is  another  testimony  of  the  same  class,  of 
still  higher  authority.  In  a  volume  entitled,  "The 
Result  of  three  Synods,  held  by  the  Elders  and  Mes- 
sengers of  the  Churches  of  Massachusetts  Province, 
New-England"  there  is  abundant  evidence  to  the  same 
effect.  These  Synods  met  in  1648,  1662,  and  1679: 
Each  of  them  was  called  by  the  General  Court,  or 
Legislature  of  the  Province,  and  the  results  published 
by  the  court,  with  their  sanction. 

The  Synod  of  1648,  consisting  of  the  divines  of 
Massachusetts  and  Connecticut,  and  which  drew  up 
what  is  commonly  known  as  the  Cambridge  Platform, 
distinctly  recognized  the  office  under  consideration  as  of 
divine  appointment.   It  speaks  as  follows,  (chapter  vii.) 

*  The  Power  of  Congregational  Churches,  &c.  p.  47.  48.  76. 


LATER  DIVINES.  155 

u The  Ruling  Elders  office  is  distinct  from  the  office  of 
Pastor  and  Teacher.  Ruling  Elders  are  not  so  called 
to  exclude  the  Pastors  and  Teachers  from  ruling} 
because  ruling  and  government  is  common  to  these 
with  the  other:  whereas  attending  to  teach  and  preach 
the  word,  is  peculiar  unto  the  former;  Romans,  xii.  7, 
8,9;  1  Timothy  v.  17;  \Corinthians  xii.  27;  Hebrews 
xiii.  17."— 

The  Synod  of  1679  gave  its  sanction,  most  unequivo- 
cally to  the  same  doctrine;  not  only  by  unanimously  re- 
newing their  approbation  of  the  Platform  of  1648,  but 
also  by  new  acts  of  the  most  decisive  character.  Two 
questions  proposed  to  the  Synod  of  1679  were,  First, 
"  What  are  the  evils  that  have  provoked  the  Lord  to  bring 
his  judgments  on  Netc-England?  Secondly,  What  is 
to  be  done,  that  so  many  evils  may  be  removed?  In 
their  answer  to  the  second  question,  the  Synod  say,  "It 
is  requisite  that  the  utmost  endeavours  should  be  used, 
in  order  to  a  full  supply  of  officers  in  the  Church,  ac- 
cording to  Christ's  institution.  The  defect  of  these 
Churches,  on  this  account,  is  very  lamentable;  there 
being,  in  most  of  the  Churches,  only  one  Teaching 
officer,  for  the  burdens  of  the  whole  congregation  to  lie 
upon.  The  Lord  Christ  would  not  have  instituted 
Pastors,  Teachers,  and  Ruling  Elders,  (nor  the  Apostles 
ordained  Elders  in  every  Church,)  if  He  had  not  seen 
that  there  was  need  of  them  for  the  good  of  his  people. 
And,  therefore,  for  men  to  think  they  can  do  well  enough 
without  them,  is  both  to  break  the  second  Command- 
ment, and  to  reflect  upon  die  wisdom  of  Christ,  as  if  he 
did  appoint  unnecessary  offices  in  his  Church."*  It  may 
not  be  improper  to  add,  that  this  Synod,  assembled  in 

*  Result  of  Three  Synods,  &c.,  p.  109. 


156  TESTIMQUY   Ot 

consequence  of  the  "  General  Court  of  the  Colony  having 
called  upon  all  the  Churches  therein  to  send  their 
Elders  and  Messengers,  that  they  might  meet  in  form 
of  a  Synod,  in  order  to  a.  most  serious  inquiry  into  the 
questions  propounded  to  them;  and  that  the  Result, 
when  proposed,  was  read  once  and  again,  each  para- 
graph being  duly  and  distinctly  weighed  in  "the  balance 
of  the  sanctuary,"  and  then,  upon  mature  deliberation, 
the  whole  unanimously  voted,  as  to  the  substance  and 
scope  thereof."* 

It  is  well  known  that  in  the  Westminster  Assembly 
of  divines  there  was  a  small  number  of  learned  and 
zealous  Independents,  who  opposed  some  of  the  most 
prominent  features  in  the  Presbyterian  form  of  govern- 
ment with  much  ardor  and  pertinacity,  and  who  pro- 
tracted the  debates  respecting  them  for  many  weeks. 
But  it  is  equally  well  known,  that  all  the  most  able  of 
those  divines  were  warm  advocates  of  the  office  of  Ru- 
ling Elder,  not  only  as  a  useful  office,  but  as  of  divine 
institution.     The  recorded  opinion  of  one  of  them, 
the  Rev.  Dr.  Goodwin,  has  been  already  stated.     No 
less  pointed  in  maintaining  the  same   opinion,  were 
Messieurs,  Bridge,   Burroughs,   and   Nye,  forming 
with  Dr.  Gooodwin,  a  majority  of  the  whole  number 
And,  accordingly,  in  their  "Reasons  against  the  Third 
Proposition  concerning  Presbyterial  government,"  they 
admit,  that  "the  Scripture  says  much  of  two  sorts  of 
Elders .  Teaching  and  Ruling;  and  in  some  places 
so  plain.,  as  if  of  purpose  to  distinguish  them ;  and, 
further,  that  the  whole  Reformed  Churches  had  these 
different  Elders."t 

The  following  very  explicit  extract  from  the  well 

*  Preface,  p.  5.  6.  |  Reatoni,  &c  p.  3.  40. 


LATER  DIVINES.  157 

laiown  work  of  the  learned  Herbert  Thorndike,  (a 
divine  of  the  Church  of  England,)  on  " Religious  As- 
semblies" chapter  iv.  p.  117,  will  show  his  opinion  on 
the  subject  before  us.  Speaking  of  the  language  of  the 
Apostle  in  1  Cor.  xii.  28,  he  eaye:  "  There  is  no  reason 
to  doubt  that  the  men  whom  the  Apostle  here  callcth 
doctors,  are  those  of  the  Presbyters  which  had  the 
abilities  of  preaching  and  teaching  the  people  at  their 
assemblies;  that  those  of  the  Presbyters  that  preached 
not,  are  here  called  by  (he  Apostle  governments ■." 

The  following  remarks  of  the  Rev.  Cotton  Mather. 
well  known  as  an  eminent  Congregationalist  of  Mas- 
sachusetts, and  author  of  the  Magnalia  Chrisli  Ame- 
ricana, have  too  much  point,  and  convey  too  much 
instruction,  to  be  omitted  in  this  list  of  testimonies. 
" There  are  some  who  cannot  see  any  such  officer  as 
what  we  call  a  Ruling  Elder,  directed  and  appointed 
in  the  word  of  God;  and  partly  through  a  prejudice 
against  the  office;  and  partly,  indeed  chiefly,  through 
a  penury  of  men  well  qualified  for  the  discharge  of  it, 
as  it  has  been  heretofore  understood  and  applied,  our 
Churches  are  now  generally  destitute  of  such  helps  in 
government.  But  unless  a  Church  have  divers  Elders, 
the  Church  government  must  needs  become  either 
prelatic  or  popular.  And  that  a  Church's  needing 
but  one  Elder,  is  an  opinion,  contrary  not  only  to 

THE  SENSE  OF  THE  FAITHFUL  IN  ALL  AGES,  but  also 

to  the  law  of  the  Scriptures,  where  there  can  be 
nothing  plainer  than  Elders  who  rule  well,  and  are 
worthy  of  double  honor,  though  they  do  not  labor  in 
the  word  and  doctrine:  whereas,  if  there  were  any 
teaching  Elders,  who  do  not  labor  in  the  word  and 
doctrine,  they  would  be  so  far  from  worthy  of  double 
honor,  that  they  would  not  be  worthy  of  any  honor  at 

o 


158  TESTIMONY  OF* 

all.  Towards  the  adjusting  of  the  difference  which  has 
thus  been  in  the  judgments  of  judicious  men,  some 
essays  have  been  made,  and  one  particularly  in  such 
terms  as  these.  Let  it  be  first  recognized,  that  all  the 
other  Church  Officers  are  the  assistants  of  the  Pastor, 
who  was  himself  intrusted  with  the  tchole  care  of  all, 
until  the  further  pity  and  kindness  of  our  Lord  Jesus 
Christ,  joined  other  officers  unto  him  for  his  assistance 
in  it.  1  suppose  none  will  be  so  absurd  as  to  deny  this 
at  least,  that  all  the  Church  Officers  are  to  take  the 
advice  of  the  Pastor  with  them.  Upon  which  I  sub- 
join, that  a  man  may  be  a  distinct  officer  from  his  Pas- 
tor, and  yet  not  have  a  distinct  office  from  him.  The 
Pastor  may  be  the  Ruling  Elder,  and  yet  he  may 
have  Elders  to  assist  him  in  ruling,  and  in  the  actual 
discharge  of  some  things  which  they  are  able  and 
proper  to  be  serviceable  to  him  in.  This  consideration 
being  laid,  I  will  persuade  myself,  every  Pastor  among 
us  will  allow  me,  that  there  is  much  work  to  be  done  for 
God  in  preparing  of  what  belongs  to  the  admission  and 
exclusion  of  Church  members ;  in  carefully  inspecting 
the  way  and  walk  of  them  all,  and  the  first  appearance 
of  evil  with  them;  in  preventing  the  very  beginnings 
of  ill  blood  among  them,  and  instructing  of  all  from 
house  to  house,  more  privately,  and  warning  of  all 
persons  unto  the  things  more  peculiarly  incumbent  on 
them :  in  visiting  all  the  afflicted,  and  informing  ofr 
and  consulting  with  the  ministers,  for  the  welfare  of  the 
whole  flock.  And  they  must  allow  me,  that  this  work 
is  too  heavy  for  any  one  man;  and  that  more  than  one 
man,  yea,  all  our  Churches,  do  suffer  beyond  measure, 
because  no  more  of  this  work  is  thoroughly  performed. 
Moreover,  they  will  acknowledge  to  me,  that  it  is  an 
usual  thing  with  a  prudent  and  faithful  Pastor  himself 


LATER   DIVINES.  159 

to  single  out  some  of  the  more  grave,  solid,  aged  brethren 
in  his  congregation,  to  assist  him  in  many  parts  of  this 
work,  on  many  occasions  in  a  year;  nor  will  such  a 
Pastor,  ordinarily,  do  any  important  thing  in  his 
government,  without  having  first  heard  the  counsels  of 
such  brethren.  In  short,  there  are  few  discreet  Pastors, 
but  what  make  many  occasional  Ruling  Elders  every 
year.  I  say,  then,  suppose  the  Church,  by  a  vote, 
recommend  some  such  brethren,  the  fittest  they  have, 
and  always  more  than  one,  unto  the  stated  assistance 
of  their  Pastor,  in  the  Church  rule,  wherein  they  may 
be  helps  unto  him.  I  do  not  propose  that  they  should 
be  biennial,  or  triennial  only,  though  I  know  very 
famous  Churches  throughout  Europe  have  them  so. 
Yea,  and  what  if  they  should  by  solemn  fasting  and 
prayer  be  commended  unto  the  benediction  of  God  in 
what  service  they  have  to  do?  What  objection  can  be 
made  against  the  lawfulness)  I  think  none  can  be 
made  against  the  usefulness  of  such  a  thing.  Truly, 
for  my  part, — if  the  fifth  chapter  of  the  first  Epistle  to 
Timothy  would  not  bear  me  out,  when  conscience, 
both  of  my  duty  and  my  weakness  made  me  desire 
such  assistance,  I  would  see  whether  the  first  chapter 
of  Deuteronomy  would  not."* 

After  these  strong  attestations  in  favor  of  the  office  of 
Ruling  Elder  from  the  most  pious  and  learned  of  the 
early  Independents,  or  Congregationalists,  of  New- 
England — it  will  naturally  occur  to  every  reader,  as 
an  interesting  question,  how  it  came  to  pass,  that 
Churches  which  once  unanimously  held  such  opinions, 
laid  so  much  stress  on  them,  and  practised  accordingly, 


*  Jlagnalia,  Sic.  Book  r.  Part  ii,  p.  206,  207.  octavo  edition 
1820. 


160  TESTIMONY  OF 

for  about  three-fourths  of  a  century,  should  have,  long: 
since,  as  unanimously,  discontinued  the  office?     The 
first  company  of  emigrants,  in  1620;  brought  a  Ruling 
Elder  with  them;   and  the  office  was  universally  re- 
tained for  many  3rears  afterwards.     Yet,  in  1702,  when 
Dr.  Cotton  Mather  published  the  first  edition  of  his 
Magnolia,  it  had  been,   as   would  seem,  from   the 
quotation  just  made,  in  a  great  measure,  laid  aside;  and 
before  the  middle  of  the  eighteenth  century,,  it  had 
entirely  disappeared  from  the  Churches  of  New-Eng- 
land.     A  well  informed  and  discerning  Friend  has 
suggested,  that  the  chief  reason  of  this  remarkable  factr 
is  probably  to  be  traced  to  another  fact  alluded  to  in  the 
following  extract.    In  a  small  volume,  printed  m  Boston, 
in   1700,  and  entitled,      "The  Order  of  the  gospel,, 
professed  and   practised  by  the  Churches  of  Christ  in 
New- England,  &c. ;"  by  Increase  Mather,  President 
of  Harvard  College,  and  Teacher  of  a  Church  in 
Boston: — In  this  work,  one  of  the  questions  discussed 
is: — "Whether  or  not  our  Brethren,  and  not  the  Elders 
of  the  Churches  only,   are  to  judge   concerning  the 
qualifications  and  fitness  of  those  who  are  admitted  into 
their  communion?"  In  answering  it,  he  says: — "If  only 
Elders  have  power  to  judge  who  are  fit  to  come  to  the 
sacrament,  or  to  join  to  the  Churches;  then,  in  case 
there  is  but  one  Elder  in  a  Church,  (as  there  are  very 
few  Churches  in  New-England  that  have  more  Elders 
than  one,)  the  sole  power  will  reside  in  that  one  man's 
hands."*     On  this  passage,  the  Friend  above  referred  to 
remarks,    "I  am  inclined  to  think  that  he  here  means 
Ruling  Elders;  for,  1.  Several  Churches  (whether  in 
consequence  of  the  recommendation  of  the  Synod  &i 

*  Order  of  the  Gospel,  &c.  p.  25> 


LATER    DIVINES.  161 

1679, 1  do  not  know)  had  then  two  ministers.  2.  Thia 
question  and  answer  of  Dr.  I.  Mather's  is  annexed  to 
a  reprint  in  Boston  (now  lying  before  me)  of  "A  Vin- 
dication of  (he  divine  authority  of  Ruling  Elders  in  the 
Church  of  Christ,  asserted  by  the  ministers  and  Elders 
met  together  in  a  Provincial  Assembly,  Nov.  2d.  1649, 
and  printed  in  London,  1650.1'  But  whether  this  was 
his  meanin-  or  not,it  is  abundantly  evident, from  various 
other  sources, that  the  Churches  of  New-England,  while 
they  retained  the  office  of  Ruling  Elder,  had  but  one 
such  Elder  at  a  time,  and  his  business  was  especially 
to  attend  to  discipline.  The  office  was,  of  course,  an 
unwelcome  one;  and  it  became  more  and  more  difficult 
to  find  men. willing  to  assume  it." 

It  appears,  then,  that  our  excellent  brethren,  the 
Puritan  Independents,  while  they  zealously  maintained 
the  divine  warrant,  and  the  great  importance  of  the 
Ruling  Elder's  office,  misapprehended  its  real  nature? 
and  placed  it  under  an  aspect  before  the  Churches 
evidently  adapted  to  discredit  and  destroy  it.  Instead 
of  appointing  a  plurality  of  these  Ruling  Riders,  they 
seldom  or  never  had  moie  than  one  in  each  Church; 
and  instead  of  uniting  the  Pastor  with  him,  and  forming 
a  regular  judicial  bench  for  regulating  the  affairs  of  the 
Church,  they  seemed  to  have  placed  each  in  a  sphere 
entirely  separate,  and  independent  of  each  other;  nay, 
to  have  made  the  offices  of  Teacher  and  Ruler,  wear 
an  apppearance  of  being  rivals  for  influence  and  power. 
Certain  it  is,  that  the.  views  entertained  by  cachrof  his 
proper  department  of  duty,  often,  in  fact,  brought  them 
into  collision,  and  made  the  situation  of  the  Ruler  both 
uncomfortable  and  useless.  Can  it  be  matter  of  surprise^ 
that,  in  these  circumstances,  the  office  of  Ruling  Elder 

in   the   congregational   Churches  of  New-England, 

o2 


162  TESTIMONY  OF 

gained  but  little  favor  with  the  body  of  the  people;  that 
it  came  to  be  considered  as,  at  once,  odious  and  useless; 
would  be  undertaken  by  few ;  and,  at  length,  fell  into- 
entire  disuse? 

The  testimony  of  the  Rev.  Dr.  John  Edwards,  an 
eminently  pious  and  learned  divine  of  the  Church  of 
England,  who  flourished  during  the  latter  half  of  the 
seventeenth  century,  is  equally  decisive  in  favor  of  this 
office.     His  language  is  as  follows: — 

"This  office  of  a  Riding  Elder  is  according  to  the 
practice  of  the  Church  of  God  among  the  Jews,  his 
own  people.     It  is  certain  that  there  was  this  kind  of 
Elders  under  that  economy. — There  were  two  sorts  of 
Elders  among  the  Jews,  the  Riding  ones,  who  go- 
verned in  their  Assemblies  and  Synagogues,  and  the 
Teaching  ones,  who  read  and  expounded  the  Scriptures. 
Accordingly,  Dr.  Light/cot,  in  his  Harmony  of  the 
New  Testament,  inclines  to  interpret  1  Timothy  5,  17,, 
of  the  Elders   in   the   Christian   congregations,  who* 
answer  to  the  lay-Elders  in  the  Jewish  Synagogue. 
For  this  learned  writer,  who  was  well  versed  in  the 
Jewish  customs  and  practices,  tells  us,  that  in  every 
Synagogue  among  the  Jews,  there  were  Elders  that 
ruled  chiefly  in  the  affairs  of  the  Synagogue,  and  other 
Elders,  that   labored  in   the  word  and.  doctrine.^ 
"And  so  it  was  in  the  Christian  Church;  there  was  a 
mixture  of  Clergy  and  Laity  in  their  consults  about 
Church  matters,  as  we  see  frequently  in  the  Acts  of 
the  Apostles.     The   Christian    Church  retained  this 
usage,  for  which  they  quote  St.  Augustine's,  137th 
Epistle,  where  he  meutions  the  Clergy  and  th  e  Elders, 
and  the  people.     So  in  his  third  book  against  Cresco- 
nius,  he  mentions  Deacons  and  Seniors*  that  is  lay- 
aiders,  for  he  distinguishes  them  from  other  Presby- 


LATER   DIVINES.  163 

ters.  One  of  his  Epistles  to  his  Church  in  Hippo  is 
thus  superscribed,  'To  the  Clergy  and  the  Elders.1 
See  chapter  5Gth,  in  the  fore-named  book  against  Cres- 
conius,  where  he  mentions  Per eg rinus,  the  Presbyter, 
and  the  Elders  (Seniores,)*  And  nothing  can  be 
plainer  than  that  of  St.  Ambrose — 'Both  the  Syna- 
gogue and  afterwards  the  Church,  had  their  Elders, 
without  whose  counsel  nothing  was  done  in  the  Church, 
<fec.'  Further,  we  read  of  these  Seniors  in  the  writings 
of  Optatus,  p.  41,  and  in  the  Epistles  annexed  to  him, 
which  the  reader  may  consult.  Thus  it  appears  that 
this  was  an  ancient  office  in  the  Church,  and 
not  invented  by  Calvin,  as  some  have  thought 
and  \vrit."t 

"And  then  as  to  the  reason  of  the  thing,  there  should 
be  no  ground  of  quarrelling  with  this  office  in  the 
Church,  seeing  it  is  useful.  It  was  instituted  for  the 
ease  of  the  preaching  Elders,  that  they  might  not  be 
overburdened  with  business,  and  that  they  might  more 
conveniently  apply  themselvess  to  that  employment 
which  is  purely  ecclesiastical  and  spiritual.     Truly  if 

•  It  will  not  escape  the  notice  of  the  discerning-  reader  that 
these  testimonies  from  AvgusUne  Ambrose,  and  Oplatus,  which 
some  hare  ventured,  very  unceremoniously,  to  treat  with  con- 
tempt, when  brougnt  forward  on  this  subject,  are  regarded  by 
this  very  learned  Episcopalian,  as  evidence  of  the  most  conclu- 
sive character. 

f  The  old  and  hacknied  allegation,  which  has  been  the 
theme  of  high-toned  Episcopalians  and  Indepe  :dents  for  more 
than  two  hundred  years,  that  Calvin  invented  and  first  intro- 
duced Ruling  Elders,  it  will  be  observed  is  confidently  rejected 
by  this  truly  learned  Episcopal  Divine,  who,  from  his  ecclesi- 
astical connexion,  cannot  be  supposed  to  have  had  any  other 
inducenvent  to  adopt  the  opinion  which  he  has  expressed,  than 
his  love  of  truth. 


164  TESTIMONY  OF 

there  was  no  such  office  mentioned  in  the  Scripturer 
we  might  reasonably  wish  for  such  a  one,  it  being  so 
useful  and  serviceable  to  the  great  purposes  of  religion. 
What  can  be  more  desirable  than  that  there  should  be 
one  or  more  appointed  to  observe  the  conversation  of 
the  flock,  in  order  to  the  exercising  of  discipline.  The 
Pastor  himself  cannot  be  supposed  to  have  an  eye  on 
every  one  of  his  charge;  and,  therefore,  it  is  fitting,  that 
out  of  those  who  are  fellow-members,  and  daily  converse 
with  one  another;  and,  therefore,  are  capable  of  ac- 
quainting themselves  with  their  manners  and  behaviour, 
there  should  be  chosen  these  Elders  I  am  speaking  of, 
to  inspect  the  carriage  and  deportment  of  the  fleck."* 

The  judgment  of  the  Rev.  Dr.  Jerome  Kromayerr 
a  very  learned  Lutheran  divine,  and  Professor  of  Di- 
vinity in  the  University  of  Leipsic,  who  lived  in  the 
seventeenth  century,  is  very  decisive  in  favor  of  the 
apostolical  institution  of  Ruling  Elders.  "Of  Presby- 
ters^ or  Elders"  says  he,  "there  were  formerly  two 
kinds,  those  who  taught,  and  those  who  exercised  the 
office  of  riders  in  the  Church.  This  is  taught  in 
1  Timothy  v.  17;  Let  the  Elders  that  rifle  well  be 
accounted  worthy  of  double  honor,  especially  they 
who  labor  in  the  word  and  doctrine.  The  latter 
were  the  same  as  our  Ministers:  the  former,  were  like 
the  members  of  our  Consistories, ,rt 

A  similar  testimony  may  be  adduced  from  Frede- 
rick Baldwin,  another  distinguished  Lutheran  divine 
and  Professor,  of  the  same  century,  who  is  no  less 


*  Theohgia  Reformula,  Vol.  i.  JVinth  Article  rf  the  Creed, 
p.  526.  528. 

f  Hisloria  Ecrlesiastica,  auctore  Hieronymo  Kromayebo, 
D.  D.  S.  S.  T.  D.  in  Acad.  Leips.  4to.  p.  59. 


LATER  DIVINES.  165 

decisive  in  favor  of  the  class  of  officers  under  consi- 
deration.* 

The  celebrated  John  Casper  Suiccr,  an  eminently- 
learned   German   divine   and  Professor,  in  his  The- 
saurus  Ecclesiasticus,  after  speaking  particularly  of 
Teaching  Presbyters  or  Elders,  in  the  first  place,  pro- 
ceeds to    speak  of  another  class  of  Elders,  who,  (he 
says,)  "chosen  from  among  the  people,  (or  laity ',)  are 
united  with  the  Pastors,  or  Ministers  of  the  Word,  that 
they  may  be  guardians  of  the  discipline  of  the  Church. 
To  these  the  Apostle  Paul  refers  in  1  Timothy  v.  17, 
where,   by  the  Elders  who  labor  in  the  word  and 
doctrine,  he  evidently  understands  that  class  of  Elders 
of  which  we  have  spoken  in  the  preceding  section :  and 
by  those  who  rule  well,  he  plainly  refers  to  the  class  of 
which  we  now  speak.     For  if  he  had  intended  to  speak 
of  only  one  class,  why  did  he  add,  especially  those  who 
labor  in  the  word  and  doctrine?     This  class  are  also 
designated  by  the  term  c^oisrafmous,  in  Romans  xii.  8, 
and  by  the  term  xvfisgvuaeis,  in  1  Corinthians  xii.  29."t 
The  very  explicit  testimony  of  Dr.  Whitby,  of  the 
Church  of  England,  was  produced  in  a  preceding 
chapter,  when  we  were  discussing  the  scriptural  evi- 
dence in  favor   of  the  office  under  consideration.     It 
need  not,  therefore,  here  be  repeated,  excepting  simply 
to  remind  the  reader  of  its  decisive  character.     The 
concessions  also  of  Bishop  Fell,  the  Rev.  Mr.  Mar  shall f 
and  the  celebrated  Mr.  Dodwell,  of  the  same  Church, 
will  also,  in  this  connexion,  be  borne  in  mind.     They 
may  be  found  in  the  fourth  chapter,  in  connexion  with 
the  testimony  from  the  Fathers. 

*  Fred.  Balduini  Inslitut.  JWinistrorum  Vcrbi.  Cap.  10. 
•f  Suiceri  Thesaurus  Ecclesiastkus,  Art.  t^Cut^c5. 


166  TESTIMONY   OF 

The  pious  and  excellent  Dr.  Watts,  though  not  a 
Presbyterian,  must  be  considered  as  indirectly  doing 
homage  to  this  part  of  the  Presbyterian  system,  when 
he  says,  (in  his  Treatise  on  the  Foundation  of  the 
Christian  Church,  p.  125,)  -'If  it  happens  that  there  is 
but  one  Minister  or  Presbyter  in  a  Church,  or  if  the 
ministers  are  young  men  of  small  experience  in  the 
world,  it  is  useful  and  proper  that  some  of  the  eldest, 
gravest,  and  wisest  members  be  deputed,  by  the  Church, 
to  join  with  and  assist  the  ministers  in  the  care  and 
management  of  that  affair,  (the  admission  and  exclu- 
sion of  members/') 

The  Rev.  Dr.  Doddridge,  universally  known  as  an 
eminently  learned  and  pious  divine  of  England,  of  the 
Independent  denomination,  in  reference  to  the  office  in 
question  speaks  thus: — "It  seeme  to  be  solidly  argued, 
from  1  Timothy  v.  17,  that  there  were,  in  the  primitive 
Church,  some  Elders,  who  did  not  use  to  preach.  No- 
thing very  express  is  said  concerning  them:  only  it 
seems  to  be  intimated,  James  v.  14,  that  they  prayed 
with  the  sick.  It  ma)*  be  very  expedient,  even  on  the 
principles  of  human  prudence,  to  appoint,  some  of  the 
more  grave  and  honorable  members  of  the  society  to 
join  with  the  Pastor  in  the  oversight  of  it,  who  may 
constitute  a  kind  of  council  with  him,  to  deliberate  on 
affairs  in  which  the  society  is  concerned,  and  prepare 
them  for  being  brought  before  the  Church  for  its  decision, 
to  pray  with  the  sick,  to  reconcile  differences,  &c."* 

The  same  distinguished  writer,  in  his  Commentary 
on  1  Timothy,  v.  17,  has  the  following  remark : — "Es- 
pecially they  who  laboi*,  &c.  This  seems  to  intimate 
that  there  were  some  who,  though  they  presided  in  the 

*  Lecture*  on  Divinity,  Proposition  150  Scholium  5tht 


LATER  DIVINES.  167 

Church,  were  not  employed  in  preaching.  Limborch, 
indeed,  is  of  opinion  that  xoviwrss  signifies  those  who 
did  even  fatigue  themselves  with  their  extraordinary 
labors,  which  some  might  not  do,  who  yet,  in  the 
general,  presided  well,  supposing  preaching  to  be  a 
part  of  their  work.  But  it  seems  to  me  much  more 
natural  to  follow  the  former  interpretation." 

The  celebrated  Professor  Neander,  of  Berlin,  was 
mentioned  in  a  preceding  chapter,  as  probably,  the  most 
profoundly  learned  Christian  antiquarian  now  living. 
In  addition  to  the  quotation  from  him  presented  in  that 
chapter,  the  following,  from  the  same  work,  is  worthy  of 
notice. 

"  That  the  name  stktxovos,  was  of  the  same  significa- 
tion with  vrgsttfivrsgos,  is  manifest  from  those  places  in 
the  New  Testament  where  these  words  are  exchanged 
the  one  for  the  other;  Acts  xx.  17.  28.  Tit.  i.  5.  7;  and 
from  those  passages  where,  after  the  office  of  Bishop 
that  of  Deacon  is  mentioned ;  so  that  no  other  office 
can  be  imagined  between  them.  If  the  name  etiaxoiros 
had  been  used  to  distinguish  any  of  these  Elders  from 
the  rest,  as  a  ruler  in  the  Church  Senate,  a  primus  inter 
pares,  this  use  of  it  interchangeably  with  vegstrfivregoe 
would  not  have  obtained." 

"These  Presbyters,  or  Bishops,  had  the  oversight  of 
the  whole  Church,  in  all  its  general  concerns ;  but  the 
office  of  teaching  was  not  appropriated  exclusively  to 
them ;  for,  as  we  have  above  remarked,  all  Christians 
had  a  right  to  speak  in  their  meetings  for  the  edification 
of  the  members.  It  does  not  follow  from  this,  however, 
that  all  the  Church  members  were  capable  of  giving 
instruction:  and  it  is  important  to  distinguish  a  faculty 
for  instruction  which  was  under  the  command  of  an 
individual,  from  the  miraculous  and  sudden  impulses  of 


168  TESTIMONY  OF 

inspiration,  as  in  prophecy,  and  the  gift  of  tongues;  and 
which  might  be- bestowed  upon  those  not  remarkably 
favored  by  natural  gifts.  The  care  of  the  Churches, 
the  preservation  and  extension  of  pure  evangelical  truth, 
ana*  the  defence  of  it  against  the  various  forms  of  error, 
which  early  appeared,  could  not  be  left  entirely  to  depend 
upon  these  extraordinary  and  often  transient  impulses. 
The  weakness  of  human  nature  to  which  was  com- 
mitted the  treasure  of  the  gospel,  as  in  ';  earthen  vessels," 
seemed  to  render  it  necessary  that  there  should  be,  in 
every  Church,  some  possessed  of  the  natural  endow- 
ments necessary  to  instruct  their  brethren  in  the  truth, 
to  warn  and  exhort  them  against  error,  and  lead  them 
forward  in  the  way  of  life.  Such  endowments  pre- 
suppose a  previous  course  of  instruction,  clearness  and 
acuteness  of  thought,  and  a  power  to  communicate  their 
ideas;  and  when  these  were  present,  and  the  Spirit  of 
God  wTas  imparted  to  animate  and  sanctify,  the  man 
became  possessed  of  the  u-^a^a^a.  SidautxctfoasS*  Those 
possessed  of  this  ^a^tffjia,  were,  on  this  account,  calculated 
for  all  the  purposes  above  alluded  to,  without  excluding 
the  remainder  from  exercising  the  gift  imparted  to  them, 
of  whatever  kind  it  might  be.  On  this  account,  the 
Xa^i<f^a  diOMxa'htcr.Sj  and  the  situation  of  teachers,  (diSaa- 
xaXioi,)  who  were  distinguished  by  this  gift,  was  repre- 
sented as  something  entirely  distinct  and  peculiar. 
(ICor.  xii.  28.  xiv.  6.  Ephes.  iv.  11.)  All  members 
of  a  Church  could,  at  times,  speak  before  their  brethren, 
either  to  call  upon  God,  or  to  praise  him,  when  so  in- 
clined ;  but  only  a  few  were  diSadxaXoi,  in  the  full  sense 
of  that  term." 

"It  is  very  clear,  too,  that  this  talent  for  teaching, 
was  different  from  that  of  governing,  (i.  e.,  y*pit\ui 
xvfispnasus,)  which  was  especially  necessary  for  him  who 


LATER    DIVINES.  169 

took  his  seat  in  the  Council  of  the  Church,  that  is  for  a 
Tpe<r€uTS£os  or  £ir«rxo<>ros.  One  might  possess  the  knowledge 
of  external  matters — the  tact,  the  Christian  prudence 
necessary  for  this  duty,  without  the  mental  qualities  so 
peculiarly  desirable  in  a  teacher.  In  the  first  apostolic 
Church,  from  which  every  thing  like  mere  arbitrary  ar 
rangements  concerning  rank  were  very  distant,  and  all 
offices  were  looked  upon  only  as  they  promised  the  attain- 
ment of  the  great  end  of  the  Christian  faith,  the  offices 
of  teacher  and  ruler,  didadxuXos  and  ttoj/^v  were  sepa- 
rated. For  this  distinction,  see  Roma?is  xii.  7,  8,  In 
noticing  this  icell  defined  distinction,  we  may  be  led  to 
the  opinion,  that  originally,  those  called,  by  way  of  pre- 
ference, teachers,  did  not  belong  to  the  class  of  rulers, 
or  overseers.  Also,  it  is  not  clearly  proved  that  they 
did  always  belong  to  the  class  of  ^etf&jr^oj.  Only  this 
is  certain — that  it  was  considered  as  desirable  that, 

AMONG  THE  RULERS  THERE  SHOULD  BE  THOSE 

capable  of  teaching  also.  When  it  is  enjoined 
upon  the  Presbyters  in  general,  as  in  the  farewell  of 
Paul  to  the  Church  of  Ephesus,  (Acts  xx.)  to  watch 
over  the  Church  and  preserve  its  doctrine  pure,  it  does 
not  necessarily  follow  that  the  duty  of  teaching,  in  its 
strict  sense,  was  insisted  on  ;  but  rather  a  general  su- 
perintendence of  the  affairs  of  that  body.  But  when,  in 
the  Epistle  to  Titus,  it  is  demanded  in  an  s^xo-ros  that 
he  not  only  "hold  fast  the  form  of  sound  words"  in 
his  private  capacity,  but  that  he  should  be  able  to 
strengthen  others  therein ;  to  overcome  opposers,  and 
*{  convince  gainsayers,"  it  seems  to  be  implied  that  he 
should  possess  the  "  gift  of  teaching."  This  must  have 
been,  in  many  situations  of  the  Churches,  exposed  as 
they  were  to  errors  of  every  kind,  highly  desirable. 
And  on  this  account,  in  1  Tim.  v.  17,  those  among  the 

p 


170  TESTIMONY  OP 

*£stf§urs£o/j  who  united  the  gift  of  teaching  (5»^a^aX»a) 
with  that  of  governing,  (xu/3s£v>j<t»$)  were  to  be  especially 
honored.  This  distinction  of  the  two  gifts  shows  that 
they  were  not  constantly  or  necessarily  united."* 

The  same  writer  savs : — "  We  find  another  office  in 
the  apostolic  times — that  of  Deacons.  The  duties  of 
this  office  were  from  the  first  only  external,  (Acts  vi.,) 
as  it  seems  to  have  taken  its  rise  for  the  sole  purpose  of 
attending  to  the  distribution  of  alms.  The  care  of  the 
poor,  however,  and  of  the  sick,  and  many  other  external 
duties  were,  in  process  of  time,  imposed  upon  those  in 
this  station.  Besides  the  Deacons,  there  were  also 
Deaconesses  appointed,  who  could  have  free  access  to 
the  female  part  of  the  Church,  which  was,  on  account 
of  the  peculiar  manners  of  the  East,  denied,  to  a  great 
extent,  to  men.  Here  the  female  had  an  opportunity 
of  exercising  her  powers  for  the  extension  of  the  true 
faith,  without  overstepping  the  bounds  of  modesty  and 
propriety,  and  in  a  field  otherwise  inaccessible.  It  was 
their  duty,  too,  as  experienced  Christian  mothers,  to 
give  advice  and  support  to  the  younger  women,  as  seems 
to  have  been  the  case  from  Tertidlian,  De  Virgin. 
Veland.  c.  9."t 

Only  one  authority  more  shall  be  adduced  on  this 
subject,  and  that  shall  be  from  the  pen  of  our  venera- 
ble and  eloquent  countryman,  the  Rev.  Dr.  Dwight, 
whose  character  for  learning,  talents,  and  piety,  needs 

*  it  is  worthy  of  notice  that  this  profound  ecclesiastical  his- 
torian, in  another  place,  quotes  Hilary  (Ambrose)  as  speaking 
of  the  Ruling-  Elders,  in  the  Synagogue,  and  in  the  Church, 
and  interprets  him  as  plainly  teaching  the  distinction  here 
made  between  teaching  and  ruling  Elders,  substantially  as  we 
have  done  in  a  preceding  chapter. 

•f  Kirchengeschichte. 


LATER  DIVINES.  171 

no  attestation  from  the  writer  of  this  Essay.  Though 
himself  a  Congregationalist,  and  without  any  other 
inducement  to  declare  in  favor  of  Ruling  Elders,  than 
that  which  the  force  of  truth  presented,  he  expresses 
himself  concerning  their  office  in  the  following  une- 
quivocal terms: — "Ruling  Elders  are,  in  my  appre- 
hension, SCRIPTURAL  OFFICERS  OF  THE  CHRISTIAN 

Church;  and  I  cannot  but  think  our  defection, 
with  respect  to  these  officers,  from  the  practice  of  the 
first  settlers  of  New-England,  an  error  in  ecclesi- 
astical GOVERNMENT."* 

This  array  of  witnesses  might  be  greatly  extended, 
were  it  proper  to  detain  the  reader  with  further  ex- 
tracts.     But  it  is  presumed  that  those   which   have 
been  produced  are  abundantly  sufficient.     It  will  be 
observed  that  no  Presbyterian  has  teen  cited  as  an  au- 
thority in  this  case.    The  names,  indeed,  of  multitudes 
of  that  denomination,  might  have  been  produced,  equal 
to  any  others  that  can  be  shown  on  the  catalogue  of 
piety,  talents,  and  learning.   But  the  testimony  of  more 
impartial  witnesses  may  be  preferred,     Recourse  has 
been  had,  then,  to  those  who  could  not  possibly  have 
been  swayed  by  a  Presbyterian  bias.   And  a  sufficiency 
of  such  has  been  produced,  it  is  hoped,  to  make  a  deep 
impression  on  candid  minds.     Romanists,  Protestant 
Episcopalians,  Lutherans  and  Independents,  have  all 
most  remarkably  concurred  in  vindicating  an  office,  the 
due  admission  and  scriptural  use  of  which  are,  perhaps, 
of  more  importance  to  the  best  interests  of  the  Church 
of  God,  than  this,  or  any  other  single  volume  can  fully 
display. 

*  Theology  Explained  and  Defended,  Vol.  iv.  p.  399. 


CHAPTER  VIII. 

RULING   ELDERS    ABSOLUTELY   NECESSARY    IN    THE. 

CHURCH. 

By  this  is  meant,  that  the  laws  which  Christ  has 
appointed  for  the  government  and  edification  of  his 
people,  cannot  possibly  be ,  executed  without  such  a, 
class  of  officers  in  fact,  whatever  name  they  may  bear. 
But  that  which  is  the  necessary  result  of  a  divine 
institution,  is  of  equal  authority  with  the  institution 
itself.  All  powers  or  instruments  really  indispensable 
to  the  faithful  and  plenary  execution  of  laws  which  an 
infinitely  wise  Governor  has  enacted,  must  be  coiir 
sidered  as  implied  in  those  laws,  even  should  they  not 
be  formally  specified. 

Now,  all  serious  impartial  readers  of  the  Bible  be- 
lieve, that,  besides  the  preaching  of  the  gospel,  and  the 
administration  of  the  sacraments,  there  is  very  much 
to  be  done  for  promoting  the  order,  purity,  and  edi- 
fication of  the  Church,  by  the  maintenance  of  a 
scriptural  Discipline.  They  believe  that  the  best  interest 
of  every  ecclesiastical  community  requires,  that  there 
be  a  constant  and  faithful  inspection  of  all  the  mem- 
bers and  families  of  the  Church ;  that  the  negligent  be 
admonished;  that  wanderers  be  reclaimed;  that  scan- 
dals be  removed ;  that  irregularities  be  corrected;  that 
differences  be  reconciled;    and  every  proper  measure 


ARE   NECESSARY.  1?3 

adopted  to  bind  the  whole  body  together  by  the  ties  of 
Christian  puiity  and  charity.  They  consider  it  as 
vitally  important  that  there  be  added  to  the  labors  of 
the  Pulpit,  those  of  teaching  "from  house  to  house," 
visiting  the  sick,  conversing  with  serious  inquirers, 
catechising  children,  learning  as  far  as  possible  the 
character  and  state  of  every  member,  even  the  poorest 
and  most  obscure,  of  the  flock,  and  endeavoring,  by 
all  scriptural  means,  to  promote  the  knowledge,  holi- 
ness, comfort  and  spiritual  welfare  of  every  individual. 
They  believe,  in  fine,  that  none  ought  to  be  admitted 
to  the  communion  of  the  Church,  without  a  careful 
examination  in  reference  to  their  knowledge,  orthodoxy, 
good  moral  character,  and  hopeful  piety;  that  none 
ought  to  be  permitted  to  remain  in  the  bosom  of  the 
Church,  without  maintaining,  in  some  tolerable  degree, 
a  character  proper  for  professing  Christians;  that  none 
ought  to  be  suspended  from  the  enjoyment  of  Church 
privileges  but  after  a  fair  trial ;  and  that  none  should  be 
finally  excommunicated  from  the  covenanted  family 
of  Christ,  without  the  most  patient  inquiry,  and  every 
suitable  effort  to  bring  them  to  repentance  and  reforma- 
tion. 

It  is,  no  ddubt,  true,  that  the  very  suggestion  of  the 
necessity  and  importance  of  discipline  in  the  Church 
is  odious  to  many  who  bear  the  Christian  name.  The 
wTorldly  and  careless  portion  of  every  Church  consider 
the  interposition  of  ecclesiastical  inspection  and  authority 
in  reference  to  the  lives  and  conversation-  of  its  mem- 
bers, as  officious  and  offensive  meddling  with  private 
concerns.  They  would  much  rather  retain  their  ex- 
ternal standing,  as  professors  of  religion,  and,  at  the 
same  time,  pursue  their  unhallowed  pleasures  without 

control.     They  never  wish  to  see  a  minister,  as  such, 

p2 


174  RULING   ELDERS 

but  in  the  Pulpit;  or  any  Church  officer  in  any  other 
place  than  his  seat  in  the  sanctuary.  To  such  persons, 
the  entire  absence  of  the  class  of  officers  for  which  we 
are  pleading,  together  with  the  exercise  of  all  their 
appropriate  functions,  would  be  matter  rather  of  felici- 
tation than  regret.  Hence  the  violent  opposition  made 
to  the  introduction  of  Ruling  Elders  into  the  Church 
of  Geneva,  by  the  wordly  and  licentious  part  of  her 
members.  And  hence  the  insuperable  repugnance  to 
the  establishment  of  sound  and  scriptural  discipline, 
manifested  so  repeatedly,  and  to  this  day,  by  some  of 
the  largest  national  Chinches  of  Europe. 

But  I  need  not  say  to  those  who  take  their  views  of 
the  Christian  Church,  and  its  real  prosperity,  from  the 
Bible,  and  from  the  best  experience,  that  enlightened, 
and   faithful    discipline   is,   not   only  important,  but 
absolutely  essential  to  the  purity  and  edification  of  the 
body  of  Christ.     It  ought  to  be  regarded  as  one  of  the 
most  precious  means  of  grace,  by  which  offenders  are 
humbled,  softened,  and   brought   to   repentance;    the 
Church   pinged   of  unworthy  members;  offences  re- 
moved ;  the  honor  of  Christ  promoted ;  real  Christians 
stimulated    and   improved    in   their    spiritual    course; 
faithful  testimony  borne  against  error  and  crime;   and 
the  professing  family  of  Christ  made  to  appear  holy  and 
beautiful  in  the  view  of  the  world.    Without  wholesome 
discipline,  for  removing   offences,  and   excluding   the 
corrupt   and   profane,   there   may   be   an   assembly,. 
but  there  cannot  be  a  Church.     The  truth  is,  the  ex- 
ercise of  a  faithful  watch  and  care  Over  the  purity  of 
each  other  in  doctrine,  worship,  and  life,  is  one  of  the 
principal  purposes  for  which  the  Christian  Church  was 
established,  and  on  account  of  which  it  is  highly  prized 
by  every  enlightened  believer.     And,  I  have  no  doubt> 


ARE    NECESSARY.  1/5 

it  may  be  safely  affirmed,  that  a  large  part  of  all  that  is 
holy  in  the  Church,  at  the  present  day,  either  in  faith 
or  practice,  may  be  ascribed,  under  God,  as  much  to 
sound  ecclesiastical  discipline,  as  to  the  faithful  preaching 
of  the  gospel. 

And  if  the  maintenance  of  discipline  be  all  important 
to  the  interests  of  true  religion,  it  is  a  matter  of  no  less 
importance  that  it  be  conducted  with  mildness,  prudence, 
and  wisdom.  Rashness,  precipitancy,  undue  severity, 
malice,  partiality,  popular  fury,  and  attempting  to  en- 
force rules  which  Christ  never  gave,  are  among  the 
many  evils  which  have  too  often  marked  the  dispensa- 
tion of  authority  in  the  Church,  and  not  unfrequently 
defeated  the  great  purpose  of  discipline.  To  conduct 
it  aright,  is,  undoubtedly,  one  of  the  most  delicate  and 
arduous  parts  of  ecclesiastical  administration;  requiring 
all  the  piety,  judgment,  patience,  gentleness,  maturity 
of  counsel,  and  prayerfulness  which  can  be  brought  to 
bear  upon  the  subject. 

Now  the  question  is,  by  whom  shall  all  these  multi- 
plied, weighty  and  indispensable  services  be  performed?" 
Besides  the  arduous  work  of  public  instruction  and 
exhortation,  who  shall  attend  to  all  the  numberless  and 
ever-recurring  details  of  inspection,  warning  and  visita- 
tion, which  are  so  needful  in  every  Christian  community? 
Will  any  say,  it  is  the  duty  of  the  Pastor  of  each  Church 
to  perform  them  all?  The  very  suggestion  is  absurd. 
It  is  physically  impossible  for  him  to  do  it.  He  cannot 
be  every  where,  and  know  every  thing.  He  cannot 
perform  what  is  expected  from  him,  and  at  the  same 
time  so  watch  over  his  whole  flock  as  to  fulfil  every  duty 
which  the  interest  of  the  Church  demands.  He  must 
"give  himself  to  reading;"  he  must  prepare  for  the 
services  of  the  pulpit;  he  must  discharge  his  various 


176  RULING  ELDERS 

public  labors;  he  must  employ  much  time  in  private^ 
in  instructing  and  counselling  those  who  apply  to  him 
for  instruction  and  advice;  and  he  must  act  his  part  hi 
the  concerns  of  the  whole  Church  with  which  he  is 
connected.  Now,  is  it  practicable  for  any  man.  however 
diligent  and  active,  to  do  all  this,  and  at  the  same  time  to 
perform  the  whole  work  of  inspection  and  government 
over  a  congregation  of  the  ordinary  size?  We  might 
as  well  expect  and  demand  any  impossibility;  and  im- 
possibilities the  great  and  merciful  Head  of  the  Church 
requires  of  no  man. 

But  even  if  it  were  reasonable  or  possible,  that  a 
Pastor  should,  alone,  perform,  all  these  duties,  ought  he 
to  be  willing  to  undertake  them;  or  ought  the  Church 
to  be  willing  to  commit  them  to  him  alone1]  We  know 
that  ministers  are  subject  to  the  same  frailties  and  im- 
perfections with  other  men.  We  know,  too,  that  a  love 
of  pre-eminence  and  of  power  is  not  only  natural  to 
them,  in  common  with  others;  but  that  this  principle, 
very  early  after  the  days  of  ihe  Apostles,  began  to  mani- 
fest itself  as  the  reigning  sin  of  ecclesiastics,  and  pro- 
duced, first  Prelacy,  and  afterwards  Popery,  which  has 
so  long  and  so  ignobly  enslaved  the  Church  of  Christ. 
Does  not  this  plainly  show  the  folly  and  danger  of 
yielding  undefined  power  to  Pastors  alone?  Is  it  wise 
or  safe  to  constitute  one  man  a  despot  over  a  whole 
Church?  Is  it  proper  to  intrust  to  a  single  individual  the 
weighty  and  complicated  work  of  inspecting,  trying, 
judging,  admitting,  condemning,  excluding  and  restor- 
ing, without  control?  Ought  the  members  of  a  Church 
to  consent  that  all  their  rights  and  privileges  in  reference 
to  Christian  communion,  should  be  subject  to  the  will  of 
a  single  man,  as  his  partiality,  kindness,  and  favoritism, 
on  the  one  hand;  or  his  caprice,  prejudice,  or  passion, 


ARE   NECESSARY.  177 

on  the  other,  might  dictate?  Such  a  mode  of  conduct- 
ing the  government  of  the  Church,  to  say  nothing  of 
its  unscriptural  character,  is,  in  the  highest  degree,  un- 
reasonable and  dangerous.  It  can  hardly  fail  to  exert 
an  influence  of  the  most  injurious  character,  both  on  the 
clergy  and  laity.  It  tends  to  nurture  in  the  former,  a 
spirit  of  selfishness,  pride  and  ambition;  and  instead  0/ 
ministers  of  holiness,  love  and  mercy,  to  transform  them 
into  ecclesiastical  tyrants.  While  its  tendency,  with  re- 
gard to  the  latter,  is  gradually  to  beget  in  them  a  blind, 
implicit  submission  to  clerical  domination.  The  eccle- 
siastical encroachments  and  despotism  of  former  times, 
already  alluded  to,  read  us  a  most  instructive  lesson  on 
this  subject.  The  fact  is,  committing  the  whole  govern- 
ment of  the  Church  to  the  hands  of  Pastors  alone,  may 
be  affirmed  to  carry  in  it  some  of  the  worst  seeds  of 
Popery;  which,  though  under  the  administration  of 
good  men,  they  may  not  at- once  lead  to  palpable  mis- 
chief, will  seldom  foil  in  producing,  in  the  end,  the  most 
serious  evils,  both'  to  those  who  govern,  and  those  who 
obey. 

Accordingly,  as  was  intimated  in  a  preceding  chapter, 
we  have  no  example  in  Scripture  of  a  Church  being 
committed  to  the  government  of  a  single  individual. 
Such  a  thing  was  unknown  in  the  Jewish  Synagogue* 
It  was  unknown  in  the  apostolic  age.  And  it  continued 
to  be  unknown,  until  ecclesiastical  pride  and  ambition 
introduced  it,  and  with  it  a  host  of  mischiefs  to  the  body 
of  Christ.  In  all  the  primitive  Churches  we  find  a  plu- 
rality of  "  Elders,"  and  we  read  enough  in  the  early 
records,  in  some  particular  cases,  to  perceive  that  these 
"Elders"  were  not  only  chosen  by  the  members  of  the 
Church,  out  of  their  own  number,  as  their  representa- 
tives, to  exercise  over  them  the  functions  of  inspection. 


178  RULING  ELDERS. 

and  ruling;  but  that,  whenever  they  ceased  to  discharge 
the  duties  of  their  office  acceptably,  they  might  be  re- 
moved from  its  actual  exercise  at  the  pleasure  of  those 
by  whom  they  were  chosen.  Thus  plainly  evincing, 
that  the  constitution  of  the  primitive  Church  was  emi- 
nently adapted  to  guard  against  ecclesiastical  tyranny; 
and  that  if  that  constitution  had  been  preserved,  the 
evils  of  clerical  encroachment  would  have  been  avoided. 
Accordingly,  it  is  remarkable  that  the  pious  Ambrose,  a 
venerable  Father  of  the  fourth  century,  quoted  in  a 
former  chapter,  expressly  conveys  an  intimation  of  this 
kind,  when  speaking  of  the  gradual  disuse  of  the  office 
of  Ruling  Elder.  "Which  order,"  says  he,  "by  what 
negligence  it  grew  into  disuse,  I  know  not,  unless,  per- 
haps, by  the  sloth,  or  rather  by  the  pride  of  the  teachers, 

WHO   ALONE  WISHED  TO  APPEAR  SOMETHING." 

"It  is  a  vain  apprehension,"  says  the  venerable  Dr. 
Owen,  "  to  suppose  that  one  or  two  teaching  officers  in 
a  Church,  who  are  obliged  to  give  themselves  unto  the 
word  and  prayer,  to  labor  in  the  wor-d  and  doctrine,  to 
preach  in  and  out  of  season — would  be  able  to  take 
care  of,  and  attend  with  diligence  unto,  all  those  things 
that  do  evidently  belong  unto  the  rule  of  the  Church. 
And  hence  it  is,  that  Churches  at  this  day  do  live  on  the 
preaching  of  the  word,  and  are  very  little  sensible  of 
the  wisdom,  goodness,  love  and  care  of  Christ  in  the 
institution  of  this  rule  in  the  Church,  nor  are  partakers 
of  the  benefits  of  it  unto  their  edification.  And  the  sup- 
ply which  many  have  hitherto  made  herein,  by  persons 
either  unacquainted  with  their  duty,  or  insensible  of 
their  own  authority,  or  cold,  if  not  negligent  in  their 
work,  doth  not  answer  the  end  of  their  institution.  And 
hence  it  is,  that  the  authority  of  government,  and  the 
benefit  of  it,  are  ready  to  be  lost  in  most  Churches. 


ARE  NECESSARY.  179 

And  it  is  both  vainly  and  presumptuously  pleaded,  to 
give  countenance  unto  a  neglect  of  their  order,  that 
some  Churches  do  walk  in  love  and  peace,  and  are 
edified  without  it;  supplying  some  defects  by  the  pru- 
dent aid  of  some  members  of  them.  For  it  is  nothing 
but  a  preference  of  our  own  wisdom,  unto  the  wisdom 
and  authority  of  Christ;  or  at  best  an  unwillingness  to 
make  a  venture  on  the  warranty  of  his  rule,  for  fear  of 
some  disadvantages  that  may  ensue  thereon."* 

If,  in  order  to  avoid  the  evils  of  the  Pastor  standing 
alone  in  the  inspection  and  government  of  his  Chnrch, 
it  be  alledged  that  the  whole  body  of  the  Church 
members  may  be  his  auxiliaries  in  this  arduous  work; 
still  the  difficulties  are  neither  removed  nor  diminished. 

For,  in  the  first  place,  a  great  majority  of  all  Church 
members,  we  may  confidently  say,  are  altogether  un- 
qualified for  rendering  the  aid  to  the  Pastor  which  is 
here  contemplated.     They  have  neither  the  knowledge, 
the  wisdom,  nor  the  prudence  necessary  for  the  purpose; 
and  to  imagine  a  case  of  ecclesiastical  regimen,  in  which 
every  weak,  childish,  and  indiscreet  individual,  who, 
though  serious  and  well-meaning  enough  to  enjoy  the 
privilege  of  Christian  communion,  is  wholly  unfit  to  be 
an  inspector  and  ruler  of  others,  should  be  associated 
with  the  Pastor,  in  conducting  the  delicate  and  arduous 
work  of  parochial  regulation,  is  too  preposterous  to  be 
regarded  with  favor,  by  any  judicious  mind.     Can  it  be 
believed  for  a  moment,  that  the  all-wise  Head  of  the 
Church  has  appointed  a  form  of  government  for  his  peo- 
ple in  which  ignorance,  weakness,  and  total  unfitness 
for  the  duty  assigned  them,  should  always,  and  almost 
necessarily,  characterize  a  great  majority  of  those  to 

*  True  Nature  of  a  Gospel  Church,  p.  177,  178. 


180  ruliKg  elders 

whom  the  oversight  and  guidance  of  the  Church  were 
committed?     Surely  this  is  altogether  incredible. 

And  if  this  consideration  possess  weight  in  regard  to 
old  and  settled  Churches,  established  in  countries  which 
hare  been  long  favored  with  the  light  and  order  of  the 
Gospel;  how  much  more  to  Pagan  lands,  and  to 
Churches  recently  gathered  from  the  wilds  of  Africa,  the 
degraded  inhabitants  of  the  Sandwich  Islands,  or  the 
miserable  devotees  of  Hindoo  idolatry?  If  in  the  best 
instructed  and  best  regulated  Churches  in  Christendom, 
a  majority  of  the  members  are  utterly  unqualified  to 
participate  in  the  government  of  the  sacred  family: 
what  can  be  expected  of  those  recent,  and  necessarily- 
dubious  converts  from  blind  heathenism,  who  must,  of 
course,  be  babes  in  knowledge  and  experience,  who  are 
surrounded  with  ignorance  and  brutality,  and  have  just 
been  snatched  themselves  from  the  same  degradation? 
Surely,  if  we  may  say,  with  propriety,  of  some  nations. 
who  have  recently  thrown  off  the  chains  of  slavery,  to 
which  they  had  long  been  accustomed,  that  they  were 
not  prepared  for  a  republican  form  of  government ;  with 
still  more  confidence  can  we  maintain,  that,  whoever 
may  be  prepared  to  take  part  in  the  government  of  the 
Church,  the  poor  novices,  in  the  situation  supposed,  are 
totally  unqualified.  Even  if  the  popular  form  of  eccle- 
siastical polity  could  be  considered  as  well  adapted  to 
the  case  of  a  people  of  more  enlightened  and  elevated 
character,  which  may  well  be  questioned; — it  must  be 
pronounced  altogether  unfit  for  a  Church  made  up  of 
such  materials.  Now  it  is  the  glory  of  the  Gospel,  that 
it  is  adapted  to  all  people,  and  all  states  of  society.  Of 
course,  that  form  of  ecclesiastical  government  which  is 
not  of  a  similar  stamp,  affords  much  ground  of  suspicion 
that  it  is  not  of  God,  and  ought  to  be  rejected. 


ARE  NECESSARY.  181 

But  further;  if  the  greater  part  of  the  members  of  the 
^Church  were  much  better  qualified  than  they  com- 
monly are,  for  co-operating  in  its  government,  would  their 
co-operation  be  likely  to  be  really  obtained  in  a  prompt, 
steady,  and  faithful  manner  ?  All  experience  pronounces 
that  it  would  not.  We  know  that  there  are  few  things, 
in  the  government  and  regulation  of  the  Church,  more 
irksome  to  our  natural  feelings,  than  doing  what  fidelity 
requires  in  cases  of  discipline.  When  the  ministers  of 
religion  are  called  upon  to  dispense  truth,  to  instruct,  to 
exhort,  and  to  administer  sacraments,  they  engage  in 
that  in  which  we  may  suppose  pious  men  habitually  to 
delight,  and  to  be  always  ready  to  proceed  with  alacrity. 
But  we  may  say  of  the  business  01  ecclesiastical  dis- 
cipline, that  it  is  the  "strange  work,"  even  of  the  pious 
and  faithful.  It  is,  in  its  own  nature,  an  unacceptable 
and  unwelcome  employment.  To  take  cognizance  of 
delinquencies  in  faith  or  practice ;  to  admonish  offenders ; 
to  call  them,  when  necessary,  before  the  proper  tribunal ; 
to  seek  out  and  array  proof  with  fidelity;  to  drag  in- 
sidious error,  and  artful  wickedness  from  their  hiding 
places;  and  to  suspend,  or  excommunicate  from  the 
privileges  of  the  Church,  when  the  honor  of  religion, 
and  the  best  interests  of  the  body  of  Christ,  call  for  these 
measures; — is  painful  work  to  eveiy  benevolent  mind. 
It  is  work  in  which  no  man  is  willing  to  engage,  unless 
constrained  by  a  sense  of  duty.  Even  those  who  aie 
bound  by  official  obligation  to  undertake  the  task,  are 
too  apt  to  shrink  from  it;  but  where  there  is  no  parti- 
cular obligation  lying  on  any  one  member  of  the  Church 
more  than  another  to  take  an  active  interest  in  this 
work — the  consequence  will  probably  be,  that  few  will 
be  disposed  to  engage  in  the  self-denying  duty.  Where 
all  are  equally  bound,  all  may  be  equally  backward,  or 


182  RULING  ELDERS 

negligent,  without  feeling  themselves  chargeable  with 
any  special  delinquency.  And,  what  is  worthy  of  notice, 
those  who  will  be  most  apt  to  go  forward  in  (his  work, 
and  proffer  their  aid  with  most  readiness,  will  generally  be 
the  bold,  the  vain. the  ardent,  the  rash,  the  impetuous; — 
precisely  those  who  are,  of  all  persons  living,  the  most 
unfit  for  such  an  employment.  But  even  if  it  were 
otherwise;  if  all  the  members  of  the  Church  were  equally 
forward  and  active,  what  might  be  expected  in  a  re- 
ligious community,  when  every  member  of  that  com- 
munity was  equally  a  ruler;  and  when  the  most  ignorant 
and  childish  busy-body  among  them,  might  be  continu- 
ally tampering  with  its  government,  and  fomenting 
disturbances,  with%s  much  potency  as  the  most  intelli- 
gent and  wise?  The  truth  is,  in  such  a  community, 
tranquillity,  order  and  peace  could  scarcely  be  expected, 
long  together,  to  have  any  place. 

We  could  scarcely  have  a  more  instructive  comment 
on  these  remarks  them  the  practice  of  those  Churches 
which  reject  Ruling  Elders.  Our  Episcopal  brethren 
reject  them.  But  they  are  obliged  to  have  their  Vestry- 
men and  Church  Wardens,  who,  though  no  divine 
warrant  is  claimed  for  them,  and  they  are  not  set  apart 
in  the  same  manner,  or  formally  invested  with  the  same 
powers  with  our  Ruling  Elders,  yet  they  perform  many 
of  the  same  functions,  in  substance,  and  are,  in  fact, 
official  counsellors  and  helps.  True,  indeed  these 
officers  are  not  clothed  with  the  power,  and  seldom 
perform  any  acts,  of  ecclesiastical  discipline,  properly 
so  called,  yet  they  may  be,  and  sometimes,  perhaps, 
are,  consulted  on  subjects  of  this  nature.  And,  where 
this  is  not  the  case,  we  may  say,  without  impropriety, 
that,  in  Churches  of  that  denomination,  no  discipline 
is  exercised.    In  the  Church  of  England,  as  is  con- 


ARE   NECESSARY.  183 

fessed  on  all  hands,  no  scriptural  discipline  exists. 
The  most  profligate  and  vile  are  not  excluded  from 
the  communion  of  the  establishment.  This  is  deeply 
lamented  by  many  of  the  pious  members  of  that 
establishment;  and  at  an  early  period,  after  the  com- 
mencement of  the  Reformation  in  that  country,  it  was 
earnestly  wished  a/id  proposed,  as  we  have  seen  in  a 
preceding  chapter,  to  introduce  Ruling  Elders,  as  a 
principal  means  of  restoring  and  maintaining  discipline. 
And  although  the  absence  of  discipline  does  not  exist, 
to  the  same  extent,  in  the  Churches  of  the  Protestant 
Episcopal  denomination  in  the  United  States;  yet,  it 
may  be  altogether  wanting,  as  to  any  pure  and  efficient 
exercise,  in  all  those  Episcopal  Churches  in  which  some 
leading,  pious  laymen  are  not  habitually  consulted  and 
employed  in  maintaining  it.  A  pious  minister,  indeed, 
of  that  denomination,  may  and  does,  conform  to  his 
rubrics,  in  giving  the  people  proper  instruction  and 
warning,  as  to  a  suitable  approach  to  the  communion 
which  he  dispenses.  But  here  he  is  commonly  obliged 
co  stop;  or,  at  any  rate,  does,  in  practice,  usually  stop. 
All  efficient  inspection  of  the  moral  condition  of  the 
whole  Church,  admonishing  the  careless,  bringing 
back  the  wanderers,  and  causing  those  who  persist 
in  error  or  in  vice,  to  feel  the  discipline  of  ecclesi- 
astical correction,  is,  notoriously,  almost  unknown  in 
the  Churches  of  the  denomination  to  which  we  refer. 
And  this  deficiency  is,  manifestly,  not  owing  to  the 
want  of  intelligent  and  conscientious  piety  in  many 
of  the  ministers  of  those  Churches;  but,  beyond  all 
doubt,  to  the  entire  want  of  an  organization  which 
alone  renders  the  exercise  of  a  faithful  and  impartial 
discipline  at  all  practicable. 

Our  Congregational  brethren   also   reject  Ruling 


184  RULING   ELDERS 

Elders.     Yet  it  is  well  known  that,  while  they  adopt 
a  form  of  government  which,  in  theory,  allows  to  every 
member  of  the  Church  an  equal  share  in  the  exercise 
of  discipline;  their  most  judicious  Pastors^  warned  by 
painful  experience  of  the  troublesome  character,  and 
uncertain  issues,  of  popular  management,  in  delicate  and 
difficult  cases  which  involve  Christian  character, — are 
careful  to  have  a  Committee  of  the  most  pious,  intelli- 
gent and  prudent  of  their  Church  members,  who  con- 
sider each  case  of  discipline  before-hand  in  private,  and 
prepare  it  for  a  public  decision ;  and  thus  perform,  in  fact, 
some  of  the  most  important  of  the  duties  of  Ruling  Elders. 
This  is  what  the  venerable  Dr.  Cotton  Mather,  doubt- 
less, means  when  he  says,  as  quoted  in  a  preceding 
chapter,  that  "there  are  few  discreet  Pastors  but  what 
make  many  occasional  Ruling  Elders  every  year;"  and 
when  he  gives  it  as  his  opinion,  in  the  same  connexion* 
that  without  something  of  this  kind,  Churches  must 
suffer  unspeakabty  with  respect  to  discipline.  And,  where 
nothing  of  this  kind  is  done,  the  experience  of  Indepen- 
dent and  Congregational  Churches,  in  conducting  disci- 
pline, it  is  well  known,  is  often  such  as  is  calculated  to 
give  deep  and  lasting  pain  to  those  who  love  the  peace 
and  order  of  the  Church.     Strife,  tumult  and  division  of 
the  most  distressing  kind,  are  often  the  consequence  of 
attempting  to  rid  the  Church  of  one  corrupt  member. 

But  perhaps  it  will  be  said,  let  the  Pastor  habitually 
call  to  his  aid7  in  conducting  the  discipline  of  the  Church, 
a  few  of  the  most  judicious  and  pious  of  his  communi- 
cants: those  whom  he  knows  to  be  most  conscientious 
and  wise  in  counsel.  But  neither  is  this  an  adequate 
remedy.  The  Pastor  may  consult  such  if  he  please. 
But  he  may  choose  to  omit  it,  and  be  governed  entirely 
by  his  own  counsels.     Or,  if  he  consult  any,  he  may 


ANE    NECESSARY.  185 

always  select  his  particular  friends,  who  he  knows,  will 
encourage  and  support  him  in  his  favorite  measures  ; 
thus  furnishing  no  real  relief  in  the  end.  How  much 
hetter  to  have  a  bench  of  assistant  Rulers,  regularly- 
chosen  by  the  people,  and  with  whom  he  shall  be 
bound  to  take  counsel  in  all  important  measures. 

Thus  it  is  that  those  Churches  which  reject  the  class 
of  officers  which  it  is  the  object  of  this  Essay  to  re- 
commend, do  practically  bear  witness  that  it  is  impos- 
sible to  conduct  discipline  in  a  satisfactory  manner, 
without  having  a  set  of  individuals,  virtually,  if  not 
formally,  vested  with  similar  powers.  Where  no  such 
efficient  substitute  is  employed,  discipline  is  either  in  a 
great  measure  neglected;  or  its  maintenance  is  attended 
with  inconveniencies  of  the  most  serious  kind.  In  other 
words,  the  opponents  of  Ruling  Elders  are  obliged  either 
to  neglect  discipline  altogether,  or,  for  maintaining  it, 
to  have  recourse  to  auxiliaries  of  similar  character  and 
power,  while  they  deny  that  there  is  any  divine  warrant 
for  them.  Now,  is  it  probable,  is  it  credible,  that  our 
blessed  Lord,  and  all-wise  King  and  Head  of  his  Church, 
and  his  Apostles,  guided  by  his  own  Spirit,  should  en- 
tirely overlook  this  necessity,  and  make  no  provision  for 
it?  It  is  not  credible.  We  must,  then,  either  suppose, 
that  some  such  officers  as  those  in  question  were  divinely 
appointed ;  or  that  means,  acknowledged  by  the  practice 
of  all  to  be  indispensable  in  conducting  the  best  interests 
of  the  Church  were  forgotten  or  neglected  by  her  divine 
Head  and  Lord.  Surely  the  latter  cannot  be  imputed 
to  infinite  Wisdom. 

There  are  some,  however,  who  acknowledge  that 
there  ought  to  be,  and  must  be,  in  every  Church,  in 
order  to  the  efficient  maintenance  of  discipline,  a  plu- 
rality of  Elders.     They  confess  that  such  a  body  or 

a  2 


186  RULING  ELDERS* 

bench  of  Elders  was  found  in  the  Jewish  Synagogue: 
that  a  similar  Eldership  existed  in  the  primitive  Church ; 
and  that  the  scriptural  government  of  a  Christian  con- 
gregation cannot  be  conducted  to  advantage  without  it. 
But  they  contend  that  these  Presbyters,  or  Elders,  ought 
all  to  be  of  the  teaching  class ;  that  there  is  no  ground 
for  the  distinction  between  Teaching  and  Ruling 
Elders;  that  every  Church  ought  to  be  furnished  with 
three  or  more  ministers,  all  equally  authorized  to  preach; 
to  administer  the  sacraments,  and  to  bear  rule. 

It  requires  little  Siscernment  to  see  that  this  plan  is 
wholly  impracticable ;  and  that  if  attempted  to  be  car- 
ried into  execution,  the  effect  must  be,  either  to  destroy 
the  Church,  or  to  degrade,  and  ultimately  to  prostrate 
the  ministry.     It  is  with  no  small  difficulty  that  most 
Churches  are  enabled  to  procure  and  support  one  quali- 
fied and  acceptable  minister.     Very  few  would  be  able 
to  afford  a  suitable  support  to  two;  and  none  but  those 
of  extraordinary  wealth,  could  think  seriously  of  under- 
taking to  sustain  three  or  more.    If,  therefore,  the  prin* 
ciple  of  a  plurality  of  Teaching  Elders  in  each  Church 
were  deemed  indispensable ;  and  if  a  regular  and  ade- 
quate training  for  the  sacred  office,  were  also,  as  now 
insisted  on :  and  if  it  were,  at  the  same  time,  considered 
as  necessary  that  every  minister  should  receive  a  com- 
petent pecuniary  support : — the  consequence,  as  is  per- 
fectly manifest,  would  be,  that  nineteen  out  of  twenty  of 
our  Churches  would  be  utterly  unable  to  maintain  the 
requisite  orginization,  and  must,  of  course,  become  ex- 
tinct.    Nay,  the  regular  establishment  of  Gospel  ordi- 
nances, in  pastoral  churches,  would  be  physically  possible 
only  in  a  very  few  great  cities,  or  wealthy  neighborhoods. 
Surely  this  cannot  be  the  system  enjoined  by  that 
Saviour  who  said — "to  the  poor  the  Gospel  is  preached." 


ARE    NECESSARY.  187 

The  only  remedy  for  this  difficulty  would  be  to  reduce 
the  preparation  and  acquirements  for  the  ministry ;  to 
make  choice  of  plain^  illiterate  men  for  this  office;  men 
of  small  intellectual  and  theological  furniture ;  depen- 
dant on  secular  employments  for  a  subsistence ;  and, 
therefore,  needing  little  or  no  support  from  the  Churches 
which  they  serve.     This  is  the  plan  upon  which  seve- 
ral sects  of  Christians  proceed ;  and  it  is  easy  to  see  that, 
upon  this  plan,  the  feeblest  Churches  may  have  a  plu- 
rality of  such  ministers  as  these,  and,  indeed,  any  num- 
ber of  them  without  being  burdened  by  their  pecuniary 
support.     But  then,  it  is  equally  evident,  that  the  execu- 
tion of  this  plan  must  result  in  degrading  the  ministerial 
character — and  in  finally  banishing  all  well  qualified 
ministers  from  the  Church,     They  could  no  longer  be 
"able  ministers  of  the  New  Testament — workmen  that 
need  not  be  ashamed."     They  could  no  longer  "give 
themselves  wholly"  to  the  labors  of  the  sacred  office. 
They  could  no  longer  "give  themselves  to  reading,"  as 
well  as  to  exhortation  and  teaching.     In  short,  the  in- 
evitable consequence  of  maintaining,  as  some  do,  that 
there  must  be  a  bench,  that  is,  a  plurality  of  Elders, 
in  every  Church,  for  the  purpose  of  inspection  and  go- 
vernment, as   well  as  of  teaching;  and,  at  the  same 
time,  that  all  these  Elders  must  be  of  the  same  class7 
that  is,  that  they  must  all  be  equally  set  apart  for 
teaching  and  ruling; — cannot  fail  to  be,  to  bring  the 
ministerial  character,   and,  of  course,  ultimately,  the 
religion  which  the  ministry  is  destined  to  explain  and 
recommend,  into  general  contempt.     The  Sandema- 
nians,  and  a  few  other  sects,  have,  substantially,  held  the 
opinion,  and  made  the  experiment  here  stated:  and 
invariably,  it  is  believed,  with  the  result  which  has 
been  represented  as  unavoidable. 


188        »  RULING  ELDERS. 

To  obviate  these  difficulties,  some  have  said,  Let 
Deacons,  whom  all  agree  to  be  scriptural  officers,  be 
employed  to  assist  the  Pastor  in  conducting  the  govern- 
ment and  discipline  of  the  Church.  This  proposal, 
together  with  some  principles  connected  with  it,  will  be 
considered  in  a  subsequent  chapter.  All  that  it  is  deemed 
necessary  or  proper  to  say  in  this  place,  is,  that  an  en- 
tirely different  sphere  of  duty  is  assigned  to  Deacons  in 
the  New  Testament.  No  hint  is  given  of  their  being 
employed  in  the  government  of  the  Church.  For  this 
proposal,  therefore,  there  is  not  the  shadow  of  a  divine 
warrant.  Besides,  if  we  assign  to  DeacoHs  the  real 
office,  in  other  words,  the  appropriate  /mictions  of 
Ruling  Elders,  what  is  this  but  granting,  the  thing, 
and  only  disputing  about  the  title!  If  it  be  granted, 
that  there  ought  to  be  a  plurality  of  officers  in  every 
Church,  whose  appropriate  duty  it  is  to  assist  the  Pastor 
in  inspecting  and  ruling  the  flock  of  CJirist,  it  is  the 
essence  of  what  is  contended  for.  Their  proper  title 
is  not  worth  a  contest,  except  so  far  as  it  may  be  proper 
to  imitate  the  language  of  Scripture. 

If,  then,  the  maintenance  of -discipline  be  essential 
to  the  purity  and  edification  of  the  Church;  if  en- 
lightened, impartial,  and  efficient  inspection  and  disci- 
pline, especially  over  a  large  congregation,  cannot  pos- 
sibly be  maintained  by  the  Pastor  alone ;  if  it  would 
be  unsafe,  and  probably  mischievous  in  its  influence  on 
all  concerned,  to  devolve  the  whole  authority  and  re- 
sponsibility of  conducting  the  government  of  a  Church 
on  a  single  individual;  if  it  would,  especially,  in  all 
probability,  essentially  injure  the  clerical  character  to  be 
thus  systematically,  made  the  depository  of  so  much 
power,  without  control,  and  without  appeal ;  if  every  other 
mode  of  furnishing  each  Church  with  a  plurality  of 


ARE  NECESSARY.  189 

rulers,  besides  that  for  which  we  contend,  would  either 
deprive  a  great  majority  of  our  Churches  of  the  means 
of  grace  altogether ;  or.  by  bringing  ministers  within 
(heir  reach,  reduce  and  degrade  the  ministerial  office  far 
below  the  standard  which  the  Scriptures  require: — If 
these  things  be  so — then  we  are  conducted  unavoidably 
to  the  conclusion,  that  such  officers  as  those  for  which 
we  contend,  are  absolutely  necessary :  that,  although  a 
Church  may  exist,  and,  for  a  time,  may  flourish  without 
them;  yet,  that  the  best  interests  of  the  Church  can- 
not be  systematically  and  steadfastly  pursued  without 
those  or  some  other  officers  of  equivalent  powers  and 
duties. 

But  all  the  difficulties  which  have  been  supposed,  are 
obviated,  and  all  the  advantages  referred  to,  attained, 
by  the  plan  of  employing  a  judicious  class  of  Ruling 
Elders  in  each  Church,  to  assist  in  counsel  and  in 
government.  In  this  plan  we  have  provided  a  body 
of  grave,  pious  and  prudent  men,  associated  wTith  the 
Pastor:  chosen  out  of  the  body  of  the  Church  members : 
carrying  with  them,  in  some  measure,  the  feelings  and 
views  of  their  constituents;  capable  of  counselling  the 
Pastor  in  all  delicate  and  doubtful  cases;  counteracting 
any  undue  influence,  or  course  of  measures  into  which 
his  partiality,  prejudice,  or  want  of  information  might 
betray  him  ;  exonerating  him  at  once  from  the  odiumr 
and  the  temptation  of  having  all  the  power  of  the 
Church  in  his  own  hands;  concluding  the  difficult 
cases  which  often  arise  in  the  exercise  of  discipline  with 
the  intelligence,  calmness,  and  wisdom,  which  cannot 
be  expected  to  prevail  in  a  promiscuous  body  of  com- 
municants ;  and,  in  a  word,  securing  to  each  Church 
all  the  principal  advantages  which  might  be  expected 
to  result  from  being  under  the  pastoral  care  of  four  or 


190  RULING  ELDERS 

five  ministers,  vested  with  plenary  preaching  as  well  as 
ruling  power ;  without,  at  the  same  time  burdening 
the  Church  with  the  pecuniary  support  of  such  a 
number  of  ordinary  Pastors.  In  a  word,  the  insupera- 
ble difficulty  of  doing  without  this  class  of  officers,  on 
the  one  hand :  the  great  and  manifest  advantages  of 
having  them,  on  the  other ;  and  the  perfect  accordance 
of  the  plan  which  includes  them,  with  that  great  repre- 
sentative system,  which  has  pervaded  all  well  regulated 
society,  from  its  earliest  existence,  and  received  the 
stamp  of  divine  approbation — form  a  mass  of  testimony 
in  favor  of  the  office  before  us,  which,  independently  of 
other  considerations,  seems  amply  sufficient  to  support 
its  claims. 

I  shall  close  this  chapter  with  the  following  extract 
fom  Dr.  Owen,  when  speaking  of  the  importance  and 
necessity  of  the  office  of  Ruling  Elders  in  the  Church. 
"It  is  evident/'  says  he,  "that  neither  the  purity  nor  the 
order,  nor  the  beauty  or  glory  of  the  Churches  of  Christ, 
nor  the  representation  of  his  own  majesty  and  authority 
in  the  government  of  them,  can  long  be  preserved  with- 
out a  multiplication  op  Elders  in  them,  accord- 
ing to  the  proportion  of  their  respective  members,  for  their 
rule  and  guidance.  And  for  want  hereof  have  Churches 
of  old,  and  of  late,  either  degenerated  into  anarchy  and 
confusion,  their  self-rule  being  managed  with  vain  dis- 
putes and  janglings,  unto  their  division  and  ruin;  or 
else  given  up  themselves  unto  the  domination  of  some 
prelatical  teachers,  to  rule  them  at  their  pleasure,  which 
proved  the  bane  and  poison  of  all  the  primitive  Churches ; 
and  they  will  and  must  do  so  in  the  neglect  of  this  order 
for  the  future."* 

— — — ^— 
*  Owen's  True  Nature  of  a  Gospel  Church,  4to.  p.  178.. 


ARE   NECESSARY.  191 

We  have  thus  completed  our  view  of  the  first  part  of 
the  inquiry  before  us,  viz.:  our  warrant  for  the  office 
of  Ruling  Elders.  If  this  office  were  found  in  the  Old 
Testament  economy ; — if  it  plainly  had  a  place  in  the 
apostolic  Church; — if  a  number  of  the  early  Fathers 
evidently  recognize  its  existence  in  their  day ; — if  the 
Witnesses  for  the  truth,  in  the  darkest  times,  and  the 
great  body  of  the  Reformers,  sanctioned  and  retained  it. 
as  of  divine  appointment; — if  some  of  the  most  learned 
Episcopal  and  Independent  divines,  since  the  Reforma- 
tion, have  borne  decisive  testimony  to  this  office,  as  of 
apostolical  authority ; — and  if  some  such  office  be 
manifestly  indispensable  to  the  purity  and  order  of  the 
Church; — we  may  confidently  conclude  that  our  war- 
rant for  it  is  complete. 


CHAPTER  IX. 

THE   NATURE  AND  DUTIES   OF  THE   OFFICE* 

Having  considered;  so  much  at  large,  the  warrant 
for  the  office  of  Ruling  Elder,  chiefly  because  there  is  no 
part  of  the  subject  more  contested  ;  we  now  proceed  to 
other  points  connected  with  the  general  inquiry.  And 
the  first  of  these  which  presents  itself  is,  the  Nature  and 
Duties  of  the  office  in  question. 

The  essential  character  of  the  officer  of  whom  we 
speak  is,  that  of  an  Ecclesiastical  Ruler.  He  that 
ruleth,  let  him  do  it  with  diligence,  is  the  summary 
of  his  appropriate  functions,  as  laid  down  in  Scripture. 
The  Teaching  Elder  is,  indeed,  also  a  rider.  In 
addition  to  this,  however,  he  is  called  to  preach  the 
gospel,  and  administer  sacraments.  But  the  particular 
department  assigned  to  the  Ruling  Elder  is  to  co-operate 
with  the  Pastor  in  spiritual  inspection  and  government. 
The  Scriptures,  as  we  have  seen,  speak  not  only  of 
"Pastors  and  Teachers,"  but  also  of  "  governments ;" — 
of  "Elders  that  rule  well,  but  do  not  labor  in  the  word 
and  doctrine." 

There  is  an  obvious  analogy  between  the  office  of 
Ruler  in  the  Church,  and  in  the  civil  community.  A 
Justice  of  the  Peace  in  the  latter,  has  a  wide  and  impor- 
tant range  of  duties.  Besides  the  function  which  he 
discharges  when  called  to  take  his  part  on  the  bench  of 


OF  THE  OFFICE.  193 

the  judicial  court  in  which  he  presides,  he  may  be,  and 
often  is,  employed  every  day,  though  less  publicly,  in 
correcting  abuses,  compelling  the  fraudulent  to  do  jus- 
tice, restraining,  arresting,  and  punishing  criminals, 
and,  in  general,  carrying  into  execution  the  laws, 
formed  to  promote  public  tranquillity  and  order,  which 
he  has  sworn  to  administer  faithfully. 

Strikingly  analagous  to  this,  are  the  duties  of  the 
ecclesiastical  Ruler.  He  has  no  power,  indeed,  to  em- 
ploy the  secular  arm  in  restraining  or  punishing  offend- 
ers against  the  laws  of  Christ.  The  kingdom  under 
which  he  acts,  and  the  authority  which  he  administers, 
are  not  of  this  world.  He  has,  of  course,  no  right  to 
fine,  imprison,  or  externally  to  molest  the  most  profli- 
gate offenders  against  the  Church's  purity  or  peace; 
unless  they  be  guilty  of  what  is  technically  called, 
"breaking  the  peace,"  that  is,  violating  the  civil  rights 
of  others,  and  thus  rendering  themselves  liable  to  the 
penalty  of  the  civil  law.  And  even  when  this  occurs, 
the  ecclesiastical  ruler,  as  such,  has  no  right  to  proceed 
against  the  offender.  He  has  no  other  than  moral 
power.  He  must  apply  to  the  civil  magistrate  for  re- 
dress, who  can  only  punish  for  breaking  the  civil  law. 
Still  there  is  an  obvious  analogy  between  his  office  and 
that  of  the  civil  magistrate.  Both  are  alike  an  ordi- 
dance  of  God.  Both  are  necessary  to  social  order  and 
comfort.  And  both  are  regulated  by  principles  which 
commend  themselves  to  the  good  sense  and  the  con- 
science of  those  who  wish  well  to  social  happiness. 

The  Ruling  Elder,  no  less  than  the  Teaching  Elder, 
or  Pastor,  is  to  be  considered  as  acting  under  the  au- 
thority of  Christ,  in  all  that  he  rightfully  does.  If  the 
office  of  which  we  speak  was  appointed  in  the  apostolic 
Church  by  infinite  wisdom ;  if  it  be  an  ordinance  of 

R 


194  NATURE  AND  DUTIES 

Jesus  Christ,  just  as  much  as  that  of  the  minister  of 
the  gospel ;  then  the  former,  equally  with  the  latter,  is 
Christ's  officer.  He  has  a  right  to  speak  and  act  in 
his  name;  and  though  elected  by  the  members  of  the 
Church,  and  representing  them,  in  the  exercise  of  eccle- 
siastical rule ;  yet  he  is  not  to  be  considered  as  deriving 
his  authority  to  rule  from  them,  any  more  than  he  who 
"labors  in  the  word  and  doctrine"  derives  his  authority 
to  preach  and  administer  other  ordinances,  from  the 
people  who  make  choice  of  him  as  their  teacher  and 
guide.  There  is  reason  to  believe  that  some,  even  in 
the  Presbyterian  Church,  take  a  different  view  of  this 
subject.  They  regard  the  Teaching  Elder  as  an  officer 
of  Christ,  and  listen  to  his  official  instructions  as  to  those 
of  a  man  appointed  by  Him,  and  coming  in  his  name. 
But  with  respect  to  the  Ruling  Elder,  they  are  wont  to 
regard  him  as  one  who  holds  an  office  instituted  by  hu- 
man prudence  alone,  and,  therefore,  as  standing  on  very 
different  ground  in  the  discharge  of  his  official  duties, 
from  that  which  is  occupied  by  the  "ambassador  of 
Christ."  This  is  undoubtedly  an  erroneous  view  of  the 
subject,  and  a  view  which,  so  far  as  it  prevails,  is  adapted 
to  exert  the  most  mischievous  influence.  The  truth 
is,  if  the  office  of  which  we  speak  be  of  apostolic  au- 
thority, we  are  just  as  much  bound  to  sustain,  honor, 
and  obey  the  individual  who  fills  it,  and  discharges  its 
duties  according  to  the  Scriptures,  as  we  are  to  submit 
to  any  other  officer  or  institution  of  our  Divine  Re- 
deemer. 

We  are  by  no  means,  then,  to  consider  Ruling  El- 
ders as  a  mere  ecclesiastical  convenience,  or  as  a  set  of 
counsellors  whom  the  wisdom  of  man  alone  has  chosen 
and  who  may,  therefore,  be  reverenced  and  obeyed,  as 
little,  or  as  much,  as  human  caprice  may  think  proper; 


OF  THE   OFFICE.  195 

but  as  bearing  an  office  of  divine  appointment, —  as  the 
"ministers  of  God  for  good"  to  his  Church, — and  whose 
lawful  and  regular  acts  ought  to  command  our  con- 
scientious obedience. 

The  Ruling  Elders  of  each  Church  are  called  to  at- 
tend to  a  public  and  formal,  or  to  a  more  private 
sphere  of  duty. 

With  regard  to  tha  first,  or  the  public  and  formal 
duties  of  their  office,  they  form,  in  the  Church  to  which 
they  belong,  a  bench  or  judicial  Court,  called  among 
us  the  '•'•  Church,  Session:'  and  in  some  other  Presby- 
terian denominations,  the  Consistory;  both  expressions 
importing  a  body  of  ecclesiastical  men,  sitting  and  act- 
ing together,  as  the  representatives,  and  for  the  benefit 
of  the  Church.  This  body  of  Elders,  with  the  Pastor 
at  their  head,  and  presiding  at  their  meetings,  form  a 
judicial  assembly,  by  which  all  the  spiritual  interests  of 
the  congregation  are  to  be  watched  over,  regulated, 
and  authoritatively  determined.  Accordingly,  it  is 
declared  in  the  ninth  chapter  of  our  Form  of  Govern- 
ment— "The  Church  Session  is  charged  with  main- 
taining the  spiritual  government  of  the  congregation; 
for  which  purpose  they  have  power  to  inquire  into  the 
knowledge  and  Christain  conduct  of  the  members  of 
the  Church;  to  call  before  them  offenders  and  wit- 
nesses, being  members  of  their  own  congregation,  and 
to  introduce  other  witnesses,  where  it  may  be  necessary 
to  bring  the  process  to  issue,  and  when  they  can  be 
procured  to  attend ;  to  receive  members  into  the  Church ; 
to  admonish,  to  rebuke,  to  suspend,  or  exclude  from 
the  sacraments,  those  who  are  found  to  deserve  censure; 
to  concert  the  best  measures  for  promoting  the  spiritual 
interests  of  the  congregation ;  and  to  appoint  delegates 
to  the  higher  judicatories  of  the  Church." 


196  NATURE   ANI>  DUTIES 

This  general  statement  of  the  powers  and  duties  of 
the  Church  Session,  it  will  be  perceived,  takes  in  a  wide 
range.     Or  rather,  to  speak  more  properly,  it  embraces 
the  whole  of  that  authority  and  fluty  with  which  the 
great  Head  of  the  Church  has  been  pleased  to  invest 
the  governing  powers  of  each  particular  congregation, 
for  the  instruction,  edification  and  comfort  of  the  whole 
body.     To  the  Church  Session  it  belongs  to  bind  and 
loose:  to  admit  to  the  communion  of  the  Church,  with 
all  its  privileges :  to  take  cognizance  of  all  departure,, 
from  the  purity  of  faith  or  practice ;  to  try,  censure, 
acquit,  or  excommunicate  those  who  are  charged  with 
offences ;  to  consult  and  determine  upon  all  matters 
relating  to  the  time,  place,  and  circumstances  of  worship, 
and  other  spiritual  concerns;  to  take  order  about  cate- 
chizing children,  congregational  Fasts  or  Thanksgiving 
days,  and  all  other  observances,  stated  or  occasional : 
to  correct,  as  far  as  possible,  every  tiling  that  may  tend 
to  disorder,  or  is  contrary  to  edification  ;  and  to  digest 
and  execute  plans  for  promoting  a  spirit  of  inquiry,  of 
reading,  of  prayer,  of  order,  and  of  universal  holiness 
among  the  members  of  the  Church.     It  is  also  in- 
cumbent on  them,  when  the  Church  over  which  they 
preside  is  destitute  of  a  Pastor,  to  take  the  lead  in  those 
measures  which  may  conduce  to  a  choice  of  a  suitable 
candidate,  by  calling  the  people  together  for  the  purpose 
of  an  election  >  when  they  consider  them  as  prepared  to 
make  it  with  advantage. 

Although,  in  ordinary  cases,  the  Pastor  of  the  Church 
may  be  considered  as  vested  with  the  right  to  decide 
whom  he  will  invite  to  occupy  his  pulpit,  either  when 
he  is  present,  or  occasionally  absent ;  yet,  in  cases  of 
difficulty  or  delicacy,  and  especially  when  ministers  of 
other  denominations  apply  for.  the  use  of  the  pulpit ;. 


OP  THE  OFFICE.  197 

it  is  the  prerogative  of  the  Church  Session,  to  consider 
and  decide  on  the  application.  And  if  there  be  any 
fixed  difference  of  opinion  between  the  Pastor,  and  the 
other  members  of  the  Session,  in  reference  to  this  mat- 
in-, it  is  the-  privilege  and  duty  of  either  party  to  request 
the  advice  of  their  Presbytery  in  the  case. 

In  the  Church  Session,  whether  the  Pastor  be  pre- 
sent and  presiding  or  not,  every  member  has  an  equal 
voire.  The  vote  of  the  most  humble  and  retiring 
Ruling  Elder,  is  of  the  same  avail  as  that  of  his 
Minister.  So  that  no  Pastor  can  carry  any  measure 
unless  he  can  obtain  the  concurrence  of  a  majority  of 
the  Eldership.  And  as  the  whole  spiritual  government 
of  each  Church  is  committed  to  its  bench  of  Elders,  the 
Session  is  competent  to  regulate  every  concern,  and  to 
correct  every  thing  which  they  consider  as  amiss  in  the 
arrangements  or  affairs  of  the  Church,  which  admits 
of  correction.  Every  individual  of  the  Session,  is  of 
course,  competent  to  propose  any  new  service,  plan,  or 
measure,  which  he  believes  will  be  for  the  benefit  of 
the  congregation,  and  if  a  majority  of  the  Elders  con- 
cur with  him  in  opinion,  it  may  be  adopted.  If,  in 
any  case,  however,  there  should  be  a  difference  of 
opinion  between  the  Pastor  and  the  Elders,  as  to  the 
propriety  or  practibility  of  any  measure  proposed,  and 
insisted  on  by  the  latter,  there  is  an  obvious  and  effec- 
tual constitutional  remedy.  A  remedy, however,  which 
ought  to  be  resorted  to  with  prudence,  caution  and 
prayer.  The  opinions  and  wishes  of  the  Pastor  ought, 
undoubtedly,  to  be  treated  with  the  most  respectful 
delicacy.  Still  they  ought  not  to  be  suffered,  when  it 
is  possible  to  avoid  it,  to  stand  in  the  way  of  a  great 
and  manifest  good.  When  such  an  alternative  occurs, 
the  remedy  alluded  to  may  be  applied.    On  an  amicable 

r2 


198  NATURE   AND  DUTIES 

reference  to  the  Presbytery,  that  body  may  decide  the 
case  between  the  parties. 

And  as  the  members  of  the  Church  Session,  whether 
assembled  in  their  judicial  capacity  or  not,  are  the  Pas- 
tors Counsellor's  and  Colleagues,  in  all  matters  relating 
to  the  spiritual  rule  of  the  Church ;  so  it  is  their  official 
duty  to  encourage,  sustain  and  defend  him,  in  the 
faithful  discharge  of  his  duty.  It  is  deplorable,  when 
a  minister  is  assailed  for  his  fidelity,  by  the  profane  or 
the  worldly,  if  any  portion  of  the  Eldership,  either  take 
part  against  him,,  or  shrink  from  his  active  and  deter- 
mined defence.  It  is  not  meant,  of  course,  that  they 
are  to  consider  themselves  as  bound  to  sustain  him  in 
every  thing  he  may  say  or  do,  whether  right  or  wrong: 
but  that,  when  they  really  believe  him  to  be  faithful, 
both  to  truth  and  duty,  they  should  feel  it  to  be  their 
duty  to  stand  by  him,  to  shield  him  from  the  arrows  o£ 
the  wicked,  and  to  encourage  hiim  as  far  as  he- obeys. 
OhrisL 

But   besides  those  duties  which  pertain  to  Ruling. 
Elders,  with  the  Pastor,  in  their  collective  capacity,  as 
d  Judicatory  of  the  Church;  there  are  others  which: 
are  incumbent  on  them  at  all  times,  in  the  intervals  of 
their  judicial  meetings,  and  by  the  due  discharge  of 
which  they  may  be  constantly  edifying  the  body  of 
Christ.     It  is  their  duty  to  have  an  eye  of  inspection, 
and  care  over  all  the  members  of  tho  congregation; 
and,  for  this  purpose,  to  cultivate  a  universal  and  inti- 
mate acquaintance,  as  far  as  may  be,  with  every  family 
in  the  flock  of  which  they  are  made  "overseers."    They 
are  bound  to,  watch  over  the  children  and  youth,  and 
especially  baptized  children,  with  paternal  vigilance,, 
recognizing  and  affectionately  addressing  them  on  all 
proper  occasions;  giving  them,  and  thek  parents  in 


OP  THE   OFFICE.  199 

reference  to  them,  seasonable  counsel,  and  putting  in 
the  Lord's  claim  to  their  hearts  and  lives,  as  the  children 
of  the  Church.     It  is  their  duty  to  attend  to  the  case  of 
those  who  are  serious,  and  disposed  to  inquire  concern- 
ing their  eternal  interest;  to  converse  with  them,  and, 
from  time  to  time,  to  give  information  concerning  them 
to  the  Pastor.     It  is  their  duty  to  take  notice  ofj  and 
admonish,  in  private,  those  who  appear  to  be  growing 
careless,  or  falling  into  habits  in  any  respect  criminal, 
suspicious  or  unpromising.     It  is  their  duty  to  visit  and 
pray  with  the  sick,  as  far  as  their  circumstances  admit, 
and  to  request  the  attendance  of  the  Pastor  on  the  sick, 
and  the  dying,  when  it  may  be  seasonable  or  desired. 
It  is  incumbent  on  them  to  assist  the  Pastor  in  main- 
taining meetings  for  social  prayer,  to  take  part  in  con- 
ducting the  devotional  exercises  in  those  meetings;  to 
preside  in  them  when  the  Pastor  is  absent ;  and,  if  they 
are  endowed  with  suitable  gifts,  under  his  direction,  oc- 
casionally to  drop  a  word  of  instruction  and  exhortation 
to  the  people  in  those  social  meetings.     If  the  officers 
of  the  Church  neglect  these  meetings,  (the  importance 
of  which  cannot  be  estimated,)  there  is  every  reason 
to  apprehend  that  they  will  not  be  duly  honored   ov 
attended  by  the   body  of  the  people.     It  is  the  duty 
of  Ruling  Elders,  also,   to  visit  the  members  of  the 
Church  and  their  families,  with  the  Pastor,  if  he  request 
it,  without  him,  if  he  do  not;  to  converse  with  them  ; 
to  instruct  the  ignorant;   to  confirm  the  wavering;  to 
caution  the  unwary;  to  reclaim  the  wandering:  to  en- 
courage the  timid,  and  to  excite  and  animate  all  classes 
to  a  faithful  and  exemplary  discharge  of  duty.     It  is 
incumbent  on  them  to  consult  frequently  and  freely 
with  their  Pastor,  on  the  interests  of  the  flock  committed 
to  their  charge;  to  aid  him  in-  forming  and  executing 


200  NATURE  AND   DUTIES 

plans  for  the  welfare  of  the  Church;  to  give  him,  from 
time  to  time  such  information  as  he  may  need,  to  enable 
him  to  perform  aright  his  various  and  momentous  duties; 
to  impart  to  him,  with  affectionate  respect,  their  advice : 
to  support  him  with  their  influence :  to  defend  his  repu- 
tation ;  to  enforce  his  just  admonitions;  and,  in  a  word, 
by  every  means  in  their  power,  to  promote  the  comfort, 
and  extend  the  usefulness  of  his  labors. 

Although  the  Church  Session  is  not  competent  to  try 
the  Pastor,  in  case  of  his  falling  into  any  delinquency, 
either  of  doctrine  or  practice ;  yet,  if  the  members  observe 
any  such  delinquency,  it  is  not  only  their  privilege,  but 
their  duty,  to  admonish  him,  tenderly  and  respectfully, 
yet  faithfully,  in  private;  and,  if  necessaiy,  from  time  to 
time;  and,  if  the  admonition  be  without  effect,  and  they 
think  the  edification  of  the  Church  admits  and  demands 
a  public  remedy,  they  ought  to  represent  the  case  to  the 
Presbytery,  as  before  suggested  in  other  cases,  and  request 
a  redress  of  the  grievance. 

But  the  functions  of  the  Ruling  Elder  are  not  con- 
fined to  the  congregation  of  which  he  is  one  of  the 
rulers.  It  is  his  duty  at  such  times,  and  in  such  order 
as  the  constitution  of  the  Church  requires,  to  take  his 
seat  in  the  higher  judicatories  of  the  Church,  and  there 
to  exercise  his  official  share  of  counsel  and  authority. 
In  every  Presbytery,  Synod  and  General  Assembly  of 
the  Presbyterian  Church,  at  least  as  many  Ruling  as 
Teaching  Elders  are  entitled  to  a  place;  and  in  all 
the  former,  as  well  as  the  latter,  have  an  opportunity 
of  exerting  an  important  influence  in  the  great  concerns 
of  Zion.  Every  congregation,  whether  provided  with 
a  Pastor  or  vacant,  is  entitled,  besides  the  Pastor,  (where 
there  is  one,)  to  be  represented  by  one  Ruling  Elder, 
in  all  meetings  of  the  Presbytery  and  Synod;  and  as 


OF  THE  OFFTCE.  .     201 

in  those  bodies,  vacant  congregations,  and  those  which 
are  supplied  with  Pastors,  are  equally  represented,  each 
by  an  Elder,  it  is  manifest  that,  if  the  theory  of  our 
ecclesiastical  constitution  be  carried  into  effect,  there 
will  always  be  a  greater  number  of  Ruling  Elders  than 
of  Pastors  present.  In  the  General  Assembly,  accord- 
ing to  our  constitutional  plan,  the  numbers  of  each  are 
precisely  equal. 

In  these  several  Judicatories  the  Ruling  Elder  has 
an  equal  vote,  and  the  same  power,  in  every  respect, 
with   the  Pastors.     He  has  the  same  privilege  of  ori- 
ginating plans  and  measures,  and  of  carrying  them, 
provided  he  can  induce  a  majority  of  the  body  to  con- 
cur in  his  views ;  and  thus  may  become  the  means  of 
imparting  his  impressions,  and  producing  an  influence 
greatly  beyond  the  particular  congregation  with  which 
he  is  connected,  and,  indeed,  throughout  the  bounds  of 
the  Presbyterian  Church  in  the  United  States.     This 
consideration  serves  to  place  the  nature  and  the  impor- 
tance of  the  office  in  the  strongest  light.     He  who 
bears  it,  has  the  interest  of  the  Church,  as  a  spiritual 
trust,  as  really  and  solemnly,  though  not  in  all  respects 
to  the  same  extent,  committed  to  him,  as  the  Elder 
who,  "labors  in  the  word  and  doctrine.5'"     He  not  only 
has  it  in  his  power,  but  is  daily  called,  in  the  discharge 
of  his  official  duties,  to  watch  over,  inspect^  regulate,  and 
edify  the  body  of  Christ:  to  enlighten  the  ignorant;  to 
admonish  the  disorderly  ;  to  reconcile  differences ;  to 
correct  every  moral  irregularity  and  abuse  within  the 
bounds  of  his  charge;  and  to  labor  without  ceasing  for 
the  promotion  of  the  cause  of  truth,  piety,,  and  universal 
righteousness  in  the  Church  to  which  he  belongs,  and 
wherever  else  he  has  an  opportunity  of  raising  his  voice,, 
and  exerting  an  influence.. 


202  NATURE  AND  DUTIES 

But  when  it  is  considered  that  those  who  bear  the 
office  in  question,  are  called  upon,  in  their  turn,  to  sit 
in  the  highest  Judicatories  of  the  Church ;  and  there  to 
take  their  part  in  deliberating  and  deciding  on  the  most 
momentous  questions  which  can  arise  in  conducting 
ecclesiastical  affairs: — when  we  reflect  that  they  are 
called  to  deliberate  and  decide  on  the  conformity  of 
doctrines  to  the  word  of  God ;  to  assist,  as  judges,  in 
the  trial  of  heretics,  and  every  class  of  offenders  against 
the  purity  of  the  Gospel;  and  to  take  care  in  their  re- 
spective spheres,  that  all  the  ordinances  of  Christ's  house 
be  preserved  pure  and  entire: — when,  in  a  word,  we 
recollect  that  they  are  ordained  for  the  express  purpose 
of  overseeing  and  guarding  the  most  precious  concerns 
of  the  Church  on  earth; — concerns  which  may  have  a 
bearing,  not  merely  on  the  welfare  of  a  single  indivi- 
dual or  congregation;  but  on  the  great  interests  of 
orthodoxy  and  piety  among  millions; — we  may  surely 
conclude  without  hesitation,  that  the  office  which  they 
sustain  is  one,  the  importance  of  which  can  scarcely  be 
over-rated :  and  that  the  estimate  which  is  commonly 
made  of  its  nature,  duties  and  responsibility,  is  far — very 
far  from  being  adequate. 

If  this  view  of  the  nature  and  importance  of  the  office 
before  us,  be  admitted,  the  question  very  naturally 
arises,  whether  it  be  correct  to  call  this  class  of  Elders, 
.Lay-Elders;  or  whether  they  have  not  such  a  strictly 
ecclesiastical  character  as  should  prevent  the  use  of  that 
language  in  speaking  of  them?  This  is  one  of  the 
points  in  the  present  discussion,  concerning  which,  the 
writer  of  this  Essay  frankly  confesses  that  he  has,  in 
some  measure,  altered  his  opinion.  Once  he  was  dis- 
posed to  confine  the  epithet  clerical  to  Teaching  Elders, 
and  to  designate  those  who  ruled  only,  and  did  not 


OF  THE  OFFICE.  203 

teach,  as  Zay-Elders.  But  more  mature  inquiry  and 
reflection  have  led  him  first  to  doubt  the  correctness  of 
this  opinion,  and  finally  to  persuade  him  that  so  far  as 
the  distinction  between  Clergy  and  Laity  is  proper  at 
all,  it  ought  not  to  be  made  the  point  of  distinction  be- 
tween these  two  classes  of  Elders;  and  that,  when  we 
speak  of  the  one  as  Clergymen,  and  the  other  as  Lay- 
men, we  are  apt  to  convey  an  idea  altogether  erroneous, 
if  not  seriously  mischievous. 

Some  judicious  and  pious  men  have,  indeed,  ex- 
pressed serious  doubts  whether  the  terms  Clergy  and 
Laity  ought  ever  to  have  been  introduced  into  our 
theological  nomenclature.  But  it  is  not  easy  to  see  any 
solid  reason  for  this  doubt.  Is  it  wise  to  contend  about 
terms,  when  the  things  intended  to  be  expressed  by 
them  are  fully  understood,  and  generally  admitted? 
The  only  question,  then,  of  real  importance  to  be  de- 
cided here,  is  this — Does  the  New  Testament  draw 
any  distinct  line  between  those  who  hold  spiritual  offices 
in  the  Church,  and  those  who  do  not?  Does  it  repre- 
sent the  functions  pertaining  to  those  offices  as  confined 
to  them,  or  as  common  to  all  Christians?  Now,  it 
seems  impossible  to  read  the  Acts  of  the  Apostles,  and 
the  several  Apostolic  Epistles,  especially  those  to  Ti- 
mothy and  Titus;  and  to  examine  in  connexion  with 
these,  the  writings  of  the  "Apostolic  Fathers,"  without 
perceiving  that  the  distinction  between  those  who  bore 
office  in  the  Church,  and  private  Christians,  was  clearly 
made,  and  uniformly  maintained,  from  the  very  origin 
of  the  Church.  That  the  terms,  Clergy  and  Laity, 
are  not  found  in  the  New  Testament,  nor  in  some  of 
the  earliest  uninspired  writers,  is  freely  granted.  But 
is  not  the  distin ction  intended  to  be  expressed  by  these 
terms  evidently  found  in  Scripture,  and  in  all  the  early 


204  NATURE  AND  DUTtES 

Fathers?  Nothing  can  be  more  indubitably  clear.  The 
titles  of  il Rulers"  in  the  house  of  God; — "Arnbassa^ 
dors  of  Christ;" — "Stewards  of  the  mysteries  of  God;" 
— "Bishops.  Leaders,  Overseers,  Elders,  Shepherds, 
Guides,  Ministers,"  &c,  as  distinguished  from  those  to 
whom  they  ministered,  are  so  familiar  to  all  readers  of 
the  New  Testament,  that  it  would  be  a  waste  of  time 
to  attempt  to  illustrate  or  establish  a  point  so  unques^ 
lion  able.  If  the  inspired  writers  every  where  represent 
certain  spiritual  offices  in  the  Church  as  appointed  by 
God ;  if  they  represent  those  who  sustain  these  offices, 
as  alone  authorized  to  perform  certain  sacred  functions; 
and  teach  us  to  consider  all  others  who  attempt  to  per- 
form them,  as  criminal  invaders  of  a  divine  ordinance ; 
then  surely  the  whole  distinction  intended  to  be  ex- 
pressed by  the  term  Clergy  and  Laity ',  is  evidently, 
and  most  distinctly  laid  down  by  the  same  authority 
which  founded  the  Church. 

The  word  xXt^os,  properly  signifies  a  lot.  And  as 
the  land  of  Canaan — the  inheritance  of  the  Israelites, — 
was  divided  among  them  by  lot,  the  word,  in  process  of 
time,  came  to  signify  an  inheritance.  In  this  figura- 
tive, or  secondary  sense,  the  term  is  evidently  employed 
in  \  Peter  v.  3.  Under  the  Old  Testament  dispensa- 
tion, the  peculiar  people  of  God  were  called  (Septuagint 
translation)  his  xXnjgos,  or  inheritance.  Of  this  we 
have  examples  in  Deuteronomy  iv.  20,  and  ix.  29. 
The  term  in  both  these  passages,  is  manifestly  applied 
to  the  whole  body  of  the  nation  of  Israel,  as  God's 
inheritance,  or  peculiar  people.  Clemens  Romanus, 
one  of  the  "Apostolic  Fathers,"  speaking  of  the  Jewish 
economy,  and  having  occasion  to  distinguish  between 
the  priests  and  the  common  people,  calls  the  latter 
Xaixoi.     Clemens  Alexandrinus,  towards  the  close  of 


OP  THE   OFFICE.  205 

\he  second  century,  speaks  of  the  Apostle  John  as 
having  set  apart  such  persons  for  "clergymen"  (xX*j£o») 
as  were  signified  to  him  by  the  Holy  Ghost.  And  in 
the  writings  of  Tertulli an,  Or igen,  and  Cyprian,  the 
terms  "clergy"  and  "laity"  occur  with  a  frequency  which 
shows  that  they  were  then  in  geneial  use.  Jerome 
observes,  that  ministers  are  called  Clerici,  either  because 
they  are  peculiarly  the  lot  and  portion  of  the  Lord ;  or 
because  the  Lord  is  their  lot,  that  is  their  inheritance. 
Hence  that  learned  and  pious  Father  takes  occasion  to 
infer; — "That  he  who  is  God's  portion  ought  so  to 
exhibit  himself,  that  he  may  be  truly  said  to  possess 
God,  and  to  be  possessed  by  Him."* 

And  as  we  have  abundant  evidence  that  ecclesiastical 
men  were  familiarly  called  Clerici,  or  "Clergymen," 
from  the  second  century ;  so  we  have  the  same  evidence 
that  this  term  was  employed  to  designate  all  ecclesias- 
tical men.  That  is,  all  persons  who  had  any  spiritual 
office  in  the  Church,  were  called  by  the  common  name 
of  Clerici,  or  "Clergymen."  It  was  applied,  continually 
to  Elders  and  Deacons,  as  well  as  to  Bishops  or 
Pastors.  Nayv  in  the  third  century,  when  not  only 
the  inceptive  steps  of  Prelacy  became  visible,  but  when 
the  same  spirit  of  innovation  .had  also  brought  in  a 
number  of  inferior  orders;  such  as  sub-Deacons, 
Readers,  Acolyths,  &c,  these  inferior  orders  were  all 
Clerici.  Cyprian,  speaking  of  a  sub-Deacon,  and  also 
of  a  Reader,  calls  them  both  Clerici.  The  ordination 
of  such  persons,  (for  it  seems  they  were  all  formally  or- 
dained,) he  calls  Ordinationes  Clerical;  and  the  letters 
which  he  transmitted  by  them,  he  styles  Liter  a  Clerical. 
The  same  fact  may  be  clearly  established  from  the 


*  Epist.  2.  ad  Nepolian.  5. 
3 


206  NATURE  AND  DUTIES 

writings  of  Ambrose,  Hilary,  and  Epiphanius,  and 
from  the  canons  of  the  Council  of  Nice.     Indeed  there 
seems  reason  to  believe,  that  in  the  fourth  and  fifth 
centuries,  and  subsequently,  the  title  of  Clerici  was 
not  only  given  to  all  the  inferior  orders  of  ecclesiastical 
men,  but  was  more  frequently  and  punctiliously  applied 
to  them,  than  to  their  superiors;  who  were  generally 
addressed  by  their  more  distinctive  and  honorable  titles. 
Those  who  recollect  that  learning,  during  the  dark  ages, 
was  chiefly  confined  to  the  ministers  of  religion ;  that 
few,  excepting  persons  of  that  profession,  were  able  to 
read  and  write;  and  that  the  whimsical  privilege,  com- 
monly called  "benefit  of  Clergy"  grew  out  of  the  rare 
accomplishment  of  being  able  to  read; — will  be  at  no 
loss  to  trace  the  etymology  of  the  word  clerk  (clericus,) 
or  secretary,  as  used  to  designate  one  who  officiates  as 
the  reader  and  writer  of  a  public  body. 

To  distinguish  the  mass  of  private  Christians  from 
those  who  bore  office  in  the  Church,  they  were  designated 
by  several  names.    They  were  sometimes  called  Xctixoi, — 
laid, — laymen,  from  Xaog,  populus ;  sometimes  i&wrai, 
"private   men,"  from   1810s,  privatus,  (Acts  iv.  13.;) 
sometimes  Biotixoi,  i.  e.  "seculars,"  from  Biog,  which  sig- 
nifies a  secular  life.  Soon  after  the  apostolic  age,  common 
Christians  were  frequently  called  avSgeg  S5ocX>i£ja£<nxoi, — 
"men   of  the  Church" — i.  e.  persons  not   belonging 
either   to   Jewish  Synagogues,  or  Pagan  temples,  or 
heretical  bodies,  but  members  of  the  Church  of  Christ. 
Afterwards,  however,  the  title  Ecclesiastics,  became 
gradually   appropriated    to   persons    in   office   in   the 
Church.* 


*  See  Stephani  Thesaurus,  and  Bingham's  Origines  Ecclt- 
siasticce. 


OF  THE  OFFICE.  207 

The  quotations  made,  in  a  former  chapter,  from 
Augustine,  and  the  writings  of  some  other  Fathers 
about  Ins  time,  in  which  they  seem  to  distinguish 
between  the  Clergy  and  the  Elders,  may  seem  to 
militate  with  the  foregoing  statement.  But  in  reference 
to  these  passages,  the  learned  Voetius,  while  he  quotes 
them,  as  decisive  of  the  general  fact,  of  the  early  existence 
of  the  Elders  under  consideration,  supposes  that  the 
office,  in  the  fourth  and  fifth  centuries,  was  beginning 
to  fall  into  disuse;  and  that,  of  course,  though  it  was 
still  found  in  some  Churches,  it  began  to  be  spoken  of 
with  less  respect,  and  sometimes  to  be  denied  a  place 
among  the  offices  strictly  clerical* 

But,  after  all,  there  is  no  real  difficulty  as  to  this 
point.  For  although  the  terms  "clergy"  and  "clerical" 
were  pretty  generally  applied  to  all  classes  of  Church 
offiers,  even  the  lowest,  in  the  third,  fourth  and  fifth 
centuries;  yet  this  was  not  always  the  case.  Thus  in 
the  Apostolical  Canons,  which  were  probably  composed 
in  the  fourth  or  fifth  centuries,  there  is  an  express  dis- 
tinction made  between  the  Deacons  and  the  Clergy. 
In  the  third  and  fourth  Canons,  having  ordered  what 
sorts  of  first-fruits  should  be  sent  to  the  Church,  and 
what  to  the  home  of  the  Bishop  and  Presbyters,  it 
ordains  as  follows: — "Now  it  is  manifest  that  they  are 
to  be  divided  by  them  among  the  Deacons  and  the 
Clergy.''''  From  cases  of  this  kind  we  may  evidently 
infer  that,  although  all  kinds  of  ecclesiastical  officers 
were  generally  ranked  among  the  Clergy,  during  the 
period  just  mentioned,  yet  this  was  not  invariably  so; 
and,  of  course,  no  inference  can  be  drawn  from  occa- 
sional diversity  of  expression  as  to  this  matter. 

*  Politicce  Ecclesiaslicce,  par.  ii.  Lib.  ii.  Tract,  iii. 


208  NATURE   AND   DUTIES 

Now,  if  this  historical  deduction  of  the  titles,  Clergy 
and  Laity,  be  correct,  it  is  plain  that,  according  to 
early  and  general  usage,  Ruling  Eiders  ought  not  to 
be  styled  laymen,  or  lay-Elders.  They  are  as  really 
in  office; — they  as  really  bear  an  office  of  divine 
appointment; — an  office  of  a  high  and  spiritual 
nature; — and  an  office,  the  functions  of  which  cannot 
be  rightfully  performed,  but  by  those  who  are  re- 
gularly set  apart  to  it — as  any  other  officer  of  the 
Christian  Church.  They  are  as  really  a  portion  of 
God's  lot; — as  really  set  over  the  laity,  or  body  of  the 
people  as  the  most  distinguished  and  venerated  minister 
of  Jesus  can  be.  Whether,  therefore,  we  refer  to  early 
usage,  or  to  strict  philological  import,  Ruling  Elders  are 
as  truly  entitled  to  the  name  of  Clergy,  in  the  only 
legitimate  sense  of  that  term, — that  is,  they  are  as  truly 
ecclesiastical  officers  as  those  who  "labor  in  the  word 
and  doctrine." 

The  scope  of  the  foregoing  remarks  will  not,  it  is 
hoped,  be  mistaken.  The  author  of  this  Essay  has  no 
zeal  either  for  retaining  or  using  the  terms  Clergy  and 
Laity.  So  far  as  the  former  term  has  been  heretofore 
used,  or  may  now  be  intended,  to  convey  the  idea  of  a 
"privileged  order"  in  the  Church; — a  dignified  body, 
lifted  up,  in  rank  and  claim,  above  the  mass  of  the 
Church  members;  in  a  word,  as  desginating  a  set  of 
men,  claiming  to  be  vicars  of  Christ,  keepers  of  the 
human  conscience,  and  the  only  channels  of  grace — he 
disclaims  and  abhors  it.  He  is  a  believer  in  no  such 
meaning  or  men.  But  so  far  as  it  is  intended  to  desig- 
nate those  who  are  clothed  with  ecclesiastical  office, 
under  the  authority  of  Christ,  and  authorised  to  dis- 
charge some  important  spiritual  functions,  which  the 
body  of  the  Church  members  are  not  authorized  to* 


OF   THE  OFFICE. 


209 


perform — and  to  mark  the  distinction  between  these 
two  classes — the  writer  is  of  the  opinion  that  the 
language  may  be  defended,  and  that  either  that,  or 
some  oilier  of  equivalent  import,  ought  to  be  used,  nay, 
must  be  used,  if  we  would  be  faithful  to  the  New 
Testament  view  of  ecclesiastical  office,  as  an  ordinance 
of  Jesus  Christ.  And  if.  the  term  Clergy,  in  this 
humble,  Christian,  and  only  becoming  sense,  be  applied 
to  those  who  preside  in  the  dispensation  of  public  ordi- 
nances; it  may  with  equal  propriety,  be  applied  to  those 
who  preside  with  Pastors,  in  the  inspection  and  rule  of 
the  Church. 

If  any  should  be  disposed  to  remark,  on  this  subject, 
that  the  use  of  the  term  Clergy  is  so  appropiiated,  by 
long  established  public  habit,  to  a  particular  class  of 
ecclesiastical  officers,  that  there  can  be  no  hope  that  the 
mass  of  the  community  will  be  reconciled  to  an  ex- 
tension of  the  title  to  Ruling  Elders; — the  answer  is — 
be  it  so.  The  writer  of  this  volume  is  neither  vain 
enough  to  expect,  nor  ambitious  enough  to  attempt,  a 
change  in  the  popular  language  to  the  amount  here 
supposed.  But  he  protests  against  the  continued  use 
of  the  term  lay-Elder,  as  really  adapted  to  make  an 
erroneous  impression.  Let  the  class  of  officers  in  ques- 
tion be  called  Ruling  Elders.  Let  all  necessary  dis- 
tinction be  made  by  saying: — "Ministers,  or  Pastors, 
Ruling  Elders,  Deacons,  and  the  Laity,  or  body  of  the 
people."  This  will  be  in  conformity  with  ancient  usage. 
This  will  be  maintaining  every  important  principle. 
This  can  offend  none ;  and  nothing  more  will  be  desired 
by  any. 

Were  the  foregoing-  views  of  the  nature  and  duties 
of  the  Elder's  office  generally  adopted,  duly  appreciated, 
and  faithfully  carried  out  into  practice,  what  a  mighty 

s  2 


3X0  NATURE  AND  DUTIES 

change  would  be  effected  in  our  Zion !  With  what  a 
different  estimate  of  the  obligations  and  responsibilities 
which  rest  upon  them,  would  the  candidates  for  this 
office  enter  on  their  sacred  work!  And  with  what 
different  feelings  would  the  mass  of  the  people,  and 
especially  all  who  love  the  cause  of  Christ,  regard  these 
spiritual  Counsellors  and  Guides,  in  their  daily  walks, 
and  particularly  in  their  friendly  and  official  visits !  This 
is  a  change  most  devoutly  to  be  desired.  The  interests 
of  the  Church  are  more  involved  in  the  prevalence  of 
just  opinions  and  practice  in  reference  to  this  office,  than 
almost  any  other  that  can  be  named.  Were  every 
congregation,  besides  a  wise,  pious  and  faithful  Pastor, 
furnished  with  eight  or  ten  Elders,  to  co-operate  with 
him  in  all  his  parochial  labors,  on  the  plan  which  has 
been  sketched  ;  men  of  wisdom,  faith,  prayer,  and 
Christian  activity;  men  willing  to  deny  and  exert 
themselves  for  the  welfare  of  Zion;  men  alive  to  the 
importance  of  every  thing  that  relates  to  the  orthodoxy, 
purity,  order  and  spirituality  of  the  Church,  and  ever  on 
the  watch  for  opportunities  of  doing  good;  men,  in  a 
word,  willing  to  "take  the  oversight"  of  the  flock  in  the 
Lord,  and  to  labor  without  ceasing  for  the  promotion  of 
its  best  interests: — Were  every  Church  furnished  with 
a  body  of  such  Elders — can  any  one  doubt  that 
knowledge,  order,  piety,  and  growth  in  grace,  as  well 
as  in  numbers,  would  be  as  common  in  our  Churches, 
as  the  reverse  is  now  the  prevailing  state  of  things,  in 
consequence  of  the  want  of  fidelity  on  the  part  of  those 
who  are  nominally  the  overseers  and  guides  of  the 
flock? 

While  discussing  the  nature  of  this  office,  and  the 
duties  which  pertain  to  it,  it  seems  to  be  natural  to. 


OF  THE  OFFICE.  211 

offer  a  few  remarks  on  the  manner  in  which  those  who 
bear  it  ought  to  be  treated  by  the  members  of  the 
Church;  in  other  words,  on  the  duties  which  the 
Church  owes  to  her  Ruling  Elders. 

And  here  the  discerning  and  pious  mind  will  be  at 
no  loss  to  perceive  that  these  duties  are  correlative  to 
those  which  the  Rulers  owe  to  the  Church*  That  is,, 
if  they  are  the  spiritual  Rulers  of  the  Church,  and 
bound  to  perform  daily,  and  with  fidelity  and  zeal,  the 
duties  which  belong  to  this  station;  it  is  evident  that 
the  members  of  the  Church  are  bound  to  recognize 
them  in  the  same  character,  and  to  honor  and  treat  them 
as  their  spiritual  guides.  Were  it,  then,  in  the  power 
of  the  writer  of  this  volume  to  address  the  members 
of  every  Presbyterian  Church  in  the  United  States,  he 
would  speak  to  them  in  some  such  language  as  the 
following: — 

Christian  Brethren, 

Every  consideration  which  has  been  urged  to  show 
the  importance  and  duties  belonging  to  the  office  of 
Ruling  Elders,  ought  to  remind  you  of  the  important 
duties  which  you  owe  to  them.  Remember,  at  all  times,, 
that  they  are  your  ecclesiastical  Rulers;  Rulers  of  your 
own  choice ;  yet  by  no  means  comi  ng  to  you  in  virtue 
of  mere  human  authority;  but  in  the  name  and  by  the 
appointment  of  the  great  Head  of  the  Church,  and,  of 
course,  the  "ministers  of  God  to  you  for  good." 

In  all  your  views  and  treatment  of  them,  then,, 
recognize  this  character.  Obey  them  "in  the  Lord,"" 
that  is,  for  his  sake,  and  as  far  as  they  bear  rule  agree- 
ably to  his  word.  "Esteem  them  very  highly  in  love 
for  their  works  sake."  And  follow  them  daily  with 
your  prayers,  that  God  would  bless  them,  and  make 


212  NATURE   ARD   DUTIES 

them  a  blessing.  Reverence  them  as  your  leaders. 
Bear  in  mind  the  importance  of  their  office,  the  arduous- 
ness  of  their  duties,  and  the  difficulties  with  which  they 
have  to  contend.  Countenance,  and  sustain  them  in 
every  act  of  fidelity ;  make  allowance  for  their  infirmities ; 
and  be  not  unreasonable  in  your  expectations  from  them. 

Many  are  ready  to  criminate  the  Elders  of  the  Church, 
for  not  taking  notice  of  particular  offences,  as  speedily. 
or  in  such  manner,  as  they  expect.  And  this  disposition 
to  find  fault  is  sometimes  indulged  by  persons  who  have 
never  been  so  faithful  themselves  as  to  give  that  infor- 
mation which  they  possessed,  respecting  the  alleged 
offences;  or  who,  when  called  upon  publicly  to  sub- 
stantiate that  which  they  have  privately  disclosed,  have 
drawn  back,  unwilling  to  encounter  the  odium  or  the 
pain  of  appearing  as  accusers,  or  even  as  witnesses. 
Such  persons  ought  to  be  the  last  to  criminate  Church 
officers  for  supposed  negligence  of  discipline.  Can  your 
Rulers  take  notice  of  that  which  never  comes  to  their 
knowledge?  Or  can  you  expect  them,  as  prudent  men, 
rashly  to  set  on  foot  a  judicial  and  public  investigation 
of  things,  concerning  which  many  are  ready  to  whisper 
in  private,  but  none  willing  to  speak  with  frankness 
before  a  court  of  Christ?  Besides,  let  it  be  recollected, 
that  the  session  of  almost  every  Church  is  sometimes 
actually  engaged  in  investigating  charges,  in  removing 
offences,  and  in  composing  differences,  which  many 
suppose  they  are  utterly  neglecting,  merely  because 
they  do  not  judge  it  to  be  for  edification,  in  all  cases,  to 
proclaim  what  they  have  done,  or  are  doing,  to  the 
congre  .a: ion  at  large. 

Your  Eiders  will  sometimes  be  called — God  grant 
that  it  may  seldom  occur! — But  they  will  sometimes 
*>e  called  Lo  the  painful  exercise  of  discipline.     Be  no* 


OF  THE   OFFICE.  213 

offended  with  them  for  the  performance  of  this  duty. 
Rather  make  the  language  of  the  Psalmist  your  own; — 
"Let  the  righteous  smite  me,  it  shall  be  a  kindness; 
and  let  him  reprove  me,  it  shall  be  an  excellent  oil, 
which  shall  not  break  my  head."  Add  not  to  the 
bitterness  of  their  official  task,  by  discovering  a  resent- 
ful temper,  or  by  indulging  in  reproachful  language,  in 
return  for  their  fidelity.  Surely  the  nature  of  the  duty 
is  sufficiently  self-denying  and  distressing,  without 
rendering  it  more  so  by  unfriendly  treatment.  Receive 
their  private  warnings  and  admonitions  with  candor 
and  affectionate  submission.  Treat  their  public  acts, 
however,  contrary  to  your  wishes,  with  respect  and 
reverence.  If  they  be  honest  and  pious  men,  can  they 
do  less  than  exercise  the  discipline  of  Christ's  house, 

cigainot  ouoli  of  you.  as  walk  dleardp.rly  ?       -^ay;  if  yOU 

be  honest  and  pious  yourselves,  can  you  do  less  than 
approve  of  their  faithfulness  in  exercising  that  discipline? 
If  you  were  aware  of  all  the  difficulties  which  attend 
this  part  of  the  duty  of  your  Eldership,  you  would  feel 
for  them  more  tenderly,  and  judge  concerning  them 
more  candidly  and  indulgently  than  you  are  often  die- 
posed  to  do.  Here  you  have  it  in  your  power,  in  a 
very  important  degree,  to  lessen  their  burdens,  and  to 
strengthen  their  hands. 

When  your  Elders  visit  your  families,  for  the  purpose 
of  becoming  acquainted  with  them,  and  of  aiding  the 
Pastor  in  ascertaining  the  spiritual  state  of  the  flock, 
remember  that  it  is  not  officious  intrusion.  It  is  nothing 
more  than  their  duty.  Receive  them,  not  as  if  you 
suspected  them  of  having  come  as  spies  or  busy  in- 
truders, but  with  respect  and  cordiality.  Convince 
them,  by  your  treatment,  that  you  are  glad  to  see  them ; 
that  you  wish  to  encourage  them  in  promoting  the  best 


214  NATURE   AND    DUTIES 

interests  of  the  Church;  and  that  you  honor  them  for 
their  fidelity.  Give  them  an  opportunity  of  seeing  your 
children,  and  of  ascertaining  whether  your  households 
are  making  progress  in  the  Christian  life.  Nay,  en- 
courage your  children  to  put  themselves  in  the  way  of 
the  Elders,  that  they  may  he  personally  known  to  them, 
and  may  become  the  objects  of  their  affectionate  notice, 
their  occasional  exhortation,  and  their  pious  prayers. 
Converse  with  the  Elders  freely,  as  with  fathers,  wTho 
"have  no  greater  joy  than  to  see  you  walking  in  the 
truth."  And  ever  give  them  cause  to  retire  under  the 
pleasing  persuasion,  that  their  office  is  honored,  that 
their  benevolent  designs  are  duly  appreciated,  and  that 
their  labors  "are  not  in  vain  in  the  Lord."  In  short,  as 
every  good  citizen  will  make  conscience  of  vindicating 

the  fidelity,  and   holding1    up   the    hand   of  tho  fuithful 

Magistrate,  who  firmly  and  impartially  executes  the 
law  of  the  land :  so  every  good  Christian  ought  to  feel 
himself  bound  in  conscience  and  honor,  as  well  as  in 
duty  to  his  Lord,  to  strengthen  the  hands,  and  en- 
courage the  heart  of  the  spiritual  Ruler,  who  evidently 
seeks,  in  the  fear  of  God,  to  promote  the  purity  and 
edification  of  the  Church. 

The  nature  of  the  office  before  us  also  leads  to  another 
remark,  with  which  the  present  chapter  will  be  closed. 
It  is,  that  "there  seems  to  be  a  peculiar  propriety  in  the 
Ruling  Elders  (and  the  same  principle  will  apply  to  the 
Deacons,  if  there  be  any  of  this  class  of  officers  in  a 
congregation)  having  a  seat  assigned  them,  for 
sitting  together,  in  a  conspicuous  part  of  the 
Church,  near  the  Pulpit,  during  the  public  service, 
where  they  can  overlook  the  whole  worshipping  assem- 
bly, and  be  seen  by  all.     The  considerations  which 


OP  THE  OFFICE.  215 

recommend  this,  are  numerous.  It  was  invariably  so 
in  the  Jewish  Synagogue.  The  same  practice,  as  we 
have  seen  in  a  former  chapter,  was  adopted  in  the  early 
Church,  as  soon  as  Christians  began  to  erect  houses  for 
public  worship.  This  official  and  conspicuous  accom- 
modation for  the  Elders  is  constantly  provided  in  the 
Dutch  Reformed  Church,  in  this  country,  and  it  is 
believed  by  most  of  the  Reformed  Churches  on  the 
continent  of  Europe.  It  is  adapted  to  keep  the  con- 
gregation habitually  reminded  who  their  Elders  are, 
and  of  their  official  authority;  and  also  to  remind  the 
Elders  themselves,  of  their  functions  and  duties.  And 
it  furnishes  a  convenient  opportunity  for  the  Pastor  to 
consult  them  on  any  question  which  may  occur,  either 
before  he  ascends  the  Pulpit,  or  at  the  close  of  the 
service. 


CHAPTER  X> 

DISTINCTION  BETWEEN   THE  OFFICES   OF    THE 
RULING  ELDER  AND  DEACON. 

These  offices  have  been  so  often  confounded,  and 
opinions  attempted  to  be  maintained  which  tend  to 
merge  the  former  in  the  latter,  that  it  is  judged  proper 
to  make  the  difference  between  them  the  subject  of 
distinct  consideration. 

The  only  account  that  we  have  in  Scripture  of  the 
origin  of  the  Deacon's  office  is  found  in  the  following 
passage,  in  the  Acts  of  the  Apostle's  vi.  1 — 6.  And  in 
those  days,  when  the  number  of  the  disciples  was 
multiplied,  there  arose  a  murmuring  of  the  Gre- 
cians against  the  Hebrews,  because  their  widows 
were  neglected  in  the  daily  ministration.  Then  the 
twelve  called  the  multitude  of  the  disciples  untothe?n, 
and  said — It  is  not  reason  that  toe  should  leave  the 
word  of  God  and  serve  tables.  Wherefore,  brethren, 
look  ye  out  among  you  seven  men,  of  honest  report^ 
full  of  the  Holy  Ghost  and  wisdom,  whom  we  may 
appoint  over  this  business.  But  we  will  give  our- 
selves continually  to  prayer,  and  to  the  ministry 
of  the  tvord.  And  the  saying  pleased  the  whole 
multitude;  and  they  chose  Stephen,  a  man  full  of 
faith  and  of  the  Holy  Ghost,  and  Philip,  and  Pro- 
chorus,  and  Nicanor}  and  Timon,  and  Parmenas, 


ELDERS  AND  DEACONS.  217 

and  Nicolas ',  a  proselyte  of  Antioch:  whom  they  set 
before  the  Apostles;  and  when  they  had  prayed,  they 
laid  their  hands  on  them. 

On  this  plain  passage  various  opinions  have  been 
entertained.  It  will  be  to  our  purpose  to  notice  a  few 
of  them. 

I.  Some  have  doubted  whether  these  were  theirs* 
Deacons  chosen  by  the  direction  of  the  inspired  Apostles. 
The  learned  Dr.  Mosheim  supposes  that  the  Church  of 
Jerusalem,  from  its  first  organization,  had  its  inferior 
ministers,  in  other  words,  its  Efeacons  ;  and  that  there  is 
a  reference  to  these,  in  the  fifth  chapter,  of  the  Acts  of 
the  Apostles,  under  the  title  of  young  men,  (vswts^oi, 
and  veavitrxoi,)  who  assisted  in  the  interment  of  Annanias 
and  Sapphira.  He  is  confident  that  the  Seven  Dea- 
cons spoken  of  in  the  passage  just  cited,  were  added 
to  the  original  number;  and  that  they  were  intentionally 
selected  from  the  foreign  Jews,  in  order  to  silence  the 
complaints  on  the  part  of  the  Grecians,  of  partiality  in 
the  distribution  of  the  offerings  made  for  the  relief  of  the 
poor.  To  this  opinion  there  seems  to  be  no  good  reason 
for  acceding.     The  objections  to  it  are  the  following: 

1.  It  is  by  no  means  probable  that  a  class  of  officers 
of  great  importance  to  the  comfort  and  prosperity  of  the 
Church,  should  have  been  instituted  by  divine  authority, 
and  yet  that  the  original  institution  should  have  been 
passed  over  by  all  the  inspired  writers  in  entire  silence. 

2.  In  this  narrative  of  the  election  and  ordination  of 
the  seven  Deacons,  there  is  not  the  most  distant  allusion 
to  any  pre-existing  officers  of  the  same  character  or 
functions.  The  murmuring  spoken  of,  seems  to  have 
proceeded  from  the  body  of  the  Grecian,  or  foreign 
Christians,  and  to  have  been  directed  against  the  body 
•of  the  native,  or  Hebrew  Christians. 

T 


218  DIFFERENCE   BETWEEN 

3.  It  is  evident,  from  the  spirit  of  the  narrative,  that 
the  appointmentof  these  Deacons  was  expressly  designed 
to  relieve  the  Apostles  themselves  of  a  laborious  service, 
with  which  they  had  been  before  encumbered,  but  which 
interfered  with  their  discharge  of  higher,  and  more  im- 
portant duties.  Surely  the  address  of  the  Apostles  would 
have  been  strange,  if  not  unmeaning,  had  there  been 
already  a  body  of  officers  who  were  intrusted  with  the 
whole  of  this  business;  and  they  had  only  been  solicited 
to  appoint  an  additiongl  number,  or  to  put  a  more 
impartial  set  in  the  place  of  the  old  incumbents. 

4.  It  is  plain  that  these  officers  were  not  chosen  from 
among  the  young  men  of  the  Church,  as  Dr.  Mosheim 
seems  to  imagine :  nor  was  the  office  itself  one  of  small 
trust  or  dignity.  The  multitude  were  directed  to  "look 
out  for  seven  men  of  honest  report,"  or  established 
reputation,  "full  of  the  Holy  Ghost  and  of  wisdom;" 
and  when  the  Apostle  Paid  afterwards  writes  to 
Timothy,  and  points  out  the  character  of  those  who 
ought  to  be  selected  for  this  office,  he  speaks  of  them  as 
married  men,  fathers  of  families,  distinguished  for  their 
gravity,  men  who  had  been  "first  proved,"  and  found 
"blameless,"  as  orthodox,  just,  temperate,  holy  men, 
regulating  their  own  households  with  firmness  and 
prudence. 

5.  Dr.  Mosheim  is  not  borne  out  by  the  best  authori- 
ties in  his  interpretation  of  the  words  veuregoi,  and  vsavicxoi. 
The  most  skilful  lexicographers  assign  to  them  no  such 
official  meaning.  Besides,  the  nature  and  responsibility 
of  the  office,  and  the  high  qualifications  for  it  pointed 
out  by  the  Apostles  at  the  time  of  this  first  choice,  and 
required  by  the  Apostle  Paul  afterwards,  when  writing 
to  Timothy,  respecting  proper  persons  to  be  chosen 
and  set  apart  as  Deacons;  by  no  means  answer  to  the 


ELDERS  AND  DEACONS.  219 

view  which  Dr.  Mosheim  takes  of  the  inferiority  of  the 
office,  or  the  propriety  of  bestowing  it  on  young  men, 
as  the  Church's  servants. 

6.  Finally;  it  may  be  doubted  whether  there  had 
been  any  real  need  of  the  Deacon's  office,  until  the  time 
arrived,  and  the  events  occured  which  are  recorded  in 
the  sixth  chapter  of  the  Acts  of  the  Apostles.  But  a  short 
time  had  elapsed  since  the  Church  had  been  organized 
on  the  New  Testament  plan.  At  its  first  organization, 
the  number  of  the  poor  connected  with  it  was  probably 
small.  But  very  shortly  after  the  day  of  Pentecost,  the 
number  of  foreigners,  who  had  come  up  to  the  feast,  and 
had  there  been  converted  to  the  Christian  faith,  was  so 
great,  and  the  number  of  these  who,  at  a  distance  from 
all  their  wonted  pecuniary  resources,  and  their  friends, 
stood  in  need  of  pecuniary  aid,  had  also  become  so  con- 
siderable, that  the  task  of  "imparting  to  those  who  had 
need,"  became,  suddenly,  a  most  arduous  employment. 
This  had  been  accomplished,  however,  for  a  short  time, 
under  the  direction  of  the  Apostles,  and  without  appoint- 
ing a  particular  class  of  officers  for  the  purpose.  But, 
when  the  foreign  Jews  came  forward,  and  made  com- 
plaint of  partiality  in  this  business,  the  Apostles,  under 
the  direction  of  heavenly  Wisdom,  called  upon  the 
"multitude"  to  make  choice  of  competent  persons  whom 
they  might  appoint  over  ihis  branch  of  Christian 
ministration.  This  appears  to  be  a  plain  history  of  the 
case,  and  to  resort  to  Dr.  Mosheiirfs  supposition,  is  to 
throw  a  strange  and  perplexed  aspect  over  the  whole 
narrative. 

II.  There  are  others  who  have  doubted  whether  the 
(i seven,"  whose  election  and  ordination  are  recorded  in 
the  6th  chapter  of  the  Acts  of  the  Apostles,  where  Deacons 
at  all.     They  allege  that  the  office  to  which  they  were 


220  DIFFERENCE   BETWEEN 

chosen  and  set  apart  was  a  mere  temporary  function,., 
not  designed  to  be  a  permanent  one  in  the  Christian. 
Church,  and  which,  probably,  did  not  last  much  if  any 
longer  than  what  is  commonly  called  "the  community 
of  goods,"  which  existed  sometime  after  the  day  of 
Pentecost. 

Against  this  supposition,  the  following  reasons  are,  in 
my  view,  conclusive. 

1.  If  this  supposition  were  admitted,  then  it  would 
follow,  that  there  is  no  account  whatever  in  the 
Scriptures  of  the  origin  or  nature  of  the  Deacon's  office. 
The  office  is  mentioned  again  and  again  in  the  New 
Testament ;  but  if  the  narrative  in  the  beginning  of  the 
sixth  chapter  of  the  Acts  of  the  Apostles,  be  not  a  state- 
ment of  its  origin,  nature  and  duties,  we  have  no 
account  of  them  any  where.  Can  this  be  considered 
as  probable? 

2.  Is  it  likely,  judging  on  the  principles,  and  from 
the  analogy  of  Scripture,  that  a  short  occasional  trust,  a 
mere  temporary  trusteeship,  if  1  may  so  speak,  would 
be  appointed  with  so  much  formality  and  solemnity; — 
marked  not  only  by  a  formal  election  of  the  people,  but 
also  by  the  prayers  and  "the  laying  on  of  the  hands" 
of  the  Apostles?  What  greater  solemnities  attended  an 
investiture  with  the  highest  and  most  permanent  offices 
in  the  Christian  Church? 

3.  It  is  a  well  known  fact,  that  in  the  Jewish  Syna- 
gogue which  was  assumed  as  the  model  of  the  primitive 
Church,  there  was  a  class  of  officers,  to  whom  the  collec- 
tion and  distribution  of  alms  for  the  poor,  were  regularly 
committed.  We  may  venture  to  presume,  then,  that 
the  appointment  of  similar  officers  in  the  Church  would 
be  altogether  likely. 

4.  When   it  is  considered  what  an  important  and; 


ELDERS   AND  DEACONS.  221 

arduous  part  of  the  Church's  duty  it  was,  in  the  apostolic 
age,  and  for  some  time  afterwards,  to  provide  for  the  very 
numerous  poor  who  looked  to  her  for  aid,  it  is  incredible 
that  there  should  be  no  class  of  officers  specifically  set 
apart  for  this  purpose.  Yet  if  the  "seven"  are  not  of 
this  class,  there  is  no  account  of  any  such  appointment 
in  the  New  Testament. 

5.  The  language  of  some  of  the  earlier,  as  well  as 
the  later  Christian  Fathers  on  this  subject, clearly  evinces 
that  they  considered  the  appointment  recorded  in  the 
chapter  of  the  Acts  of  the  Apostles,  now  under  considera- 
tion, as  the  appointment  of  Christian  Deacons — and 
as  exhibiting  the  nature  of  that  office,  and  the  great 
purpose  for  which  it  was  instituted.  A  small  speci- 
men of  the  manner  in  which  they  speak  on  the  sub- 
ject will  be  sufficient  to  establish  this  position.  Her  mas, 
one  of  the  apostolical  Fathers  in  his  Similitude,  9, — 
27,  expresses  himself  thus: — "For  what  concerns  the 
tenth  mountain,  in  which  were  the  trees  covering  the 
cattle;  they  are  such  as  have  believed,  and  some  of  them 
have  been  Bishops,  that  is  presidents  of  the  Churches. 
Then  such  as  have  been  set  over  inferior  ministries, 
and  have  protected  the  poor  and  the  widows.  Origen, 
( Tract.  16,  in  Matt.,)  evidently  considered  the  Deacons 
as  charged  with  the  pecuniary  concerns  of  the  Church. 
"The  Deacons,"  says  he,  "preside  over  the  money 
tables  of  the  Church."  And  again,  "  Those  Deacons, 
who  do  not  manage  well  the  money  of  the  Churches 
committed  to  their  care,  but  act  a  fraudulent  part,  and 
dispense  it,  not  according  to  justice,  but  for  the  purpose 
of  enriching  themselves;  these  act  the  part  of  money- 
changers, and  keepers  of  those  tables  which  our  Lord 
overturned.  For  the  Deacons  were  appointed  to  preside 
over  the  tables  of  the  Church,  as  we  are  taught  in  the 

t  2 


222  DIFFERENCE   BETWEEN 

Acts  of  the  Apostles."  Cyprian  speaks  (Epist.  25.)  of 
a  certain  Deacon  who  had  been  deposed  from  his  "sacred 
Diaconate,  on  account  of  his  fraudulent  and  sacrilegious 
misapplication  of  the  Church's  money  to  his  own 
private  use;  and  for  his  denial  of  the  widow's  and 
orphan's  pledges  deposited  with  him."  And,  in  another- 
place,  (Epist.  3,  ad  Rogatianum,)  he  refers  the  appoint- 
ment of  the  first  Deacons  to  this  choice  and  ordination 
at  Jerusalem.  It  seems,  then,  that  the  Deacons,  in  the 
days  of  Cyprian,  were  intrusted  with  the  care  of  widows 
and  orphans,  and  the  funds  of  the  Church  destined  foF 
their  relief.  It  is  incidentally  stated  in  the  account  of 
the  persecution  under  the  emperor  Decius,  in  the  third 
century,  that  by  order  of  the  emperor,  Laurentius,  one 
of  the  Deacons  of  Rome>  waa  seized,  under  the  expecta^ 
tion  of  finding  the  money  of  the  Church,  collected  for 
the  use  of  the  poor,  in  his  possession.  It  is  furtheF 
stated,  that  this  money  had  really  been  in  his  possession^, 
but  that,  expecting  the  storm  of  persecution,  he  had 
distributed  it  before  his  seizure. 

Eusebius;  (Lib.  ii.  cap.  1.)  says; — There  were  also 
'•seven  approved  men  ordained  Deacons,  through  prayei 
and  the  imposition  of  the  Apostle's  hands,"  and  ha 
immediately  afterwards  speaks  of  Stephen  as  one  of  the 
number.  Dorothains,  Bishop  of  Tyre,  contemporary 
with  Eusebius^  also  says;  (Lives of  the  Prophets,  &c.,) 
"Stephen,  the  first  Martyr,  and.  one  of  the  seven 
Deacons,  was  stoned  by  the  Jews  at  Jerusalem,  as 
Luke  testifieth  in  the  Acts  of.  the  Apostles." 

Ambrose,  in  speaking  of  the  fourth  century,  the  time 
in  which  he  livedo  says,  (Comment,  in  Ephes.  iv,) 
"The  Deacons. do  not. publicly  preach."  Chrysostomf 
who  lived  in  the  same  century,  in  his  commentary  on 
this  .very  passage,  in  Acts  vi,observes,  that  "the  Deacons 


ELDERS   AND    DEACONS.  223: 

had  need  of  great  wisdom,  although  the  preaching  of  the 
word  was  not  committed  to  them ;"  and  remarks  further, 
that  "it  is  absurd  to  suppose  that  they  should  have  both 
the  offices  of  preaching  and  taking  care  of  the  poor 
committed  to  them,  seeing  it  is  impossible  for  (hem  to 
discharge  both  functions  adequately."  Sozomen,  the 
ecclesiastical  historian,  who  lived  in  the  fifth  century, 
says;  (Lib.  v.  cap.  8.)  that  "the  Deacon's  office  was  to 
keep  the  Church's  goods."  In  the  Apostolical  Consti- 
tution^ which,  though  undoubtedly  spurious  as  an 
apostolical  work,  may  probably  be  referred  to  the  fourth 
or  fifth  centuries,  it  is  recorded;  (Lib.  8,  cap.  28.)  "It  is 
not  lawful  for  the  Deacons  to  baptize,  or  to  administer 
the  Eucharist,  or  to  pronounce  the  greater  or  smaller 
benediction."  Jerome,  in  his  letter  to  Evagrius,ca\h 
Deacons  "ministers  of  tables  and  widows?  Oecume- 
nius,  a  learned  commentator,  who  lived  several  centuries 
after  Jerome,  in  his  commentary  on  Acts  vi.,  expresses 
himself  thus: — "The  Apostles  laid  their  hands  on  those 
who  were  chosen  Deacons,  not  to  confer  on  them  thai 
rank  which  they  now  hold  in  the  Church,  butthatthey 
might,  with  all  diligence  and  attention,  distribute  ths 
necessaries  of  life  to  widows  and  orphans?  And  the 
Council  oiTridlo,  in  the  sixth  century,  expressly  asserts 
(Can.  16,)  that  the  seven  Deacons  spoken  of  in  the 
Acts  of  the  Apostles,  are  not  to  be  understood  of  such  as 
ministered  in  divine  service,  or  in  sacred  mysteries ;  but 
only  of  such  as  served  tables,  and  attended  the  pooi\ 
Another  consideration,  which  shows  beyond  contro- 
versy that  the  early  Christians  universally  considered 
the  "seven"  spoken  of  in  the  sixth  chapter  of  the  Acts 
of  the  Apostles,  as  the  proper  New  Testament  Deacons, 
is  that,  for  several  centuries,  many  of  the  largest  and 
most  respectable  Churches  in  the  world  considered  them- 


224  DIFFERENCE  BETWEEN 

selves  as  bound,  in  selecting  their  Deacons,  to  confine 
themselves  to  the  exact  number  seven,  whatever  might 
be  their  extent  and  their  exigencies,  on  the  avowed 
principle  of  conformity  to  the  number  of  this  class  of 
officers  first  appointed,  in  the  mother  Church  at  Jerusa- 
lem.    The  Council  of  Neocasarea  enacted  it  into  a 
canon,  that  there  should  be  but  seven  Deacons  in  any 
city,  however  great,  because  this  was  according  to  the 
rule  laid  down  in  the  Acts  of  the  Apostles.     And  the 
Church  of  Rome,  both  before  and  after  this  Council, 
seems  also  to  have  looked  upon  that  example  as  binding; 
for  it  is  evident  from  the  Epistles  of  Cornelius,  written 
in  the  middle  of  the  third  century,  that  there  were  but 
seven  Deacons  in  the  Church  of  Home  at  that  time, 
though  there  were  forty-six  Presbyters.     Prudentius 
intimates  that  it  was  so  in  the  time  of  Sixtus,  also,  in 
the  year  261 ;  for  speaking  of  Laurentius,  the  Deacon, 
he  terms  him  the  chief  of  those  "seven  men,"'  who  had 
their  station  near  the  altar,  meaning  the  Deacons  of  the 
Church.     Nay,  in  the  fourth  and  fifth  centuries,  the 
custom  in  that  city  continued  the  same,  as  we  iearn 
both  from  JSozomen  and  Hilary,  the  Roman  Deacon, 
who  wrote  under  the  name  of  Ambrose* 

6.  The  current  opinion  of  all  the  most  learned  and 
judicious  Christian  Divines,  of  all  denominations,  for 
several  centuries  past,  is  decisively  in  favor  of  consider- 
ing the  passage  in  Acts  vi.,  as  recording  the  first  appoint- 
ment of  the  New  Testament  Deacons.  Among  all 
classes  of  theologians,  Catholic  and  Protestant,  Lutheran 
and  Calvinistic,  Presbyterian  and  Episcopal,  this  con- 
currence of  opinion  approaches  so  near  to  unani- 
mity, that  we  may,  without  injustice  to  any  other 

*  BrNGHAM's  Orirines  Ecclesiastica,  B.  ii.  ch.  20,  sect.  19. 


ELDERS   AND  DEACONS.  225 

opinion,  consider  it  as  the  deliberate  and  harmonious 
judgment  of  the  Christian  Church. 

The  very  learned  Suicer,  a  German  Professor  of  the 
seventeenth  century,  in  his  Thesaurus  E 'celesta sticus, 
(Art.  Aiaxovos,)  makes  the  following  statement  on  this 
subject : — "  In  the  apostolic  Church,  Deacons  were 
those  who  distributed  alms  to  the  poor,  and  took  care  of 
them  :  in  other  words,  they  were  the  treasurers  of  the 
Church's  charity.  The  original  institution  of  this  class 
of  officers  is  set  forth  in  the  sixth  chapter  of  the  Acts  of 
the  Apostles.  With  respect  to  them,  the  16th  canon 
of  the  Council  of  Constantine  (in  Trullo)  says: — 
u  They  are  those  to  whom  the  common  administering 
to  poverty  is  committed;  not  those  who  administer 
the  sacraments.  And  Aristinus,  in  his  Synopsis  of 
the  Canons  of  the  same  Council,  Canon  18th,  says  r — 
"  Let  him  who  alleges  that  the  seven,  of  whom  men- 
tion is  made  in  the  Acts  of  the  Apostles,  were  Deacons, 
know  that  the  account  there  given  is  not  of  those  who 
administer  the  sacraments, butof  such  as  "served  tables." 
Zbnaras,  ad  Canon.  16,  Trullanum.  p.  145,  says, those 
who  by  the  Apostles  were  appointed  to  the  Diaconate^ 
were  not  ministers  of  spiritual  things,  but  ministers  and 
dispensers  of  meats.  Oecumenius  also,  on  the  6th 
chapter  of  the  Acts  of  the  Apostles,  says: — They  laid  their 
hands  on  the  Deacons  who  had  been  elected,  which  of- 
fice was  by  no  means  the  same  with  that  which  ob- 
tains at  the  present  day  in  the  Church,  (i.  e.  undei  the 
same  name;)  but  that  with  the  utmost  care  and  dili- 
gence, they  might  distribute  what  was  necessary  to  the 
sustenance  of  orphans  and  widows." 

From  these  considerations,  1  feel  myself  warranted  in 
concluding  with  confidence,  that  the  "seven,"  chosen 
*t  Jerusalem,  to  "  serve  tables,"  were  scriptural  Deacons, 


226  DIFFERENCE  BETWEEN 

and  the  first  Deacons;  and  that,  of  course,  every  attempt 
to  evade  the  necessary  consequence  of  admitting  this 
fact,  is  wholly  destitute  of  support. 

III.  A  third  opinion  held  by  some  on  this  subject  is, 
that,  although  the  passage  recorded  in  the  beginning 
of  the  sixth  chapter  of  the  Acts  of  the  Apostles,  is  an 
account  of  the  first  appointment  of  New  Testament 
Deacons;  and  though  their  primary  function  was  to 
take  care  of  the  poor,  and  "serve  tables;"  yet  that  the 
appropriate  duties  of  their  office  were  afterwards  enlarged. 
Thus  the  Prelatists  say,  that  Philip,  one  of  the  "seven.'' 
is  found,  soon  after  his  appointment  as  Deacon,  preach- 
ing and  baptizing.  Hence  they  infer  that  these  func- 
tions of  right  pertain  to  the  Deacon's  office,  and  have 
belonged  to  it  from  the  beginning.  On  the  other  hand, 
some  Independents  say,  that  the  word  Deacon,  accord- 
ing to  its  Greek  etymology,  means  minister  or  servant; 
that  this  general  term  may  cover  a  large  field  of  ecclesi- 
astical service;  and  that  New  Testament  Deacons  were, 
probably,  at  first  intended,  and  now  ought  to  be  em- 
ployed, to  assist  the  Pastor  in  counsel  and  government, 
as  well  as  in  serving  the  Lord's  table,  and  attending  to 
the  relief  of  the  poor.  And  even  some  Presbyterians 
have  expressed  the  opinion,  that  our  Ruling  Elders 
were  a  kind  of  Deacons  in  disguise,  and  ought  so  to 
be  considered  and  called  ;  and  that  there  ought  not.  to 
be,  and  cannot  bq,  consistently  with  Scripture,  any  office 
bearer,  charged  with  the  duty  of  assisting  the  Pastor  in 
counsel  and  rule,  other  than  the  Deacon. 

I  am  fully  persuaded  that  this  is  an  erroneous  opinion.. 
It  appears  to  me  manifest,  not  only  that  it  is  inconsistent 
with  the  form  of  government  of  the  Presbyterian  Church; 
but  what  is  a  much  more  serious  difficulty,  that  it  is 
altogether  irreconcileable  with  the  New  Testament.  For4 


ELDERS   AND   DEACONS.  227 

1.  An  attentive  and  impartial  perusal  of  the  record  of 
this  first  institution  of  Deacons,  must  convince  anyone, 
that  preaching,  baptizing,  or  partaking  in  the  spiritual 
rule  and  governmqnt  of  the  Church,  were  so  far  from 
being  embraced  in  the  original  destination  of  the  New 
Testament  Deacon,  that  they  were  all  absolutely  pre- 
eluded,  by  the  very  terms,  and  the  whole  spirit  of  the 
representation  given  by  the  inspired  historian.  The 
things  complained  of  by  the  Grecian  believers,  are,  no 
that  the  preaching  was  defective,  or  that  the  govern- 
ment and  discipline  of  the  Church  were  badly 
managed.  Not  a  hint  of  this  kind  is  given.  The  only 
complaint  was,  that  the  poor  "widows  had  been 
neglected ;"  in  other  words,  had  not  had  the  due  share 
of  attention  to  their  wants,  and  of  relief  from  the  Church's 
bounty.  To  remove  all  cause  of  complaint  on  this 
score,  the  "seven"  were  chosen  and  set  apart.  The 
sphere  of  duty  to  which  they  were  appointed,  was  one 
which  the  Apostles  declared  they  could  not  fulfil  without 

LEAVING    THE    WORD    OF    GoD    TO  SERVE  TABLES."* 

They  say,  therefore,  to  the  members  of  the  Church,* 
"look  ye  out  seven  men  of  honest  report,  full  of  the 
Holy  Ghost  and  of  wisdom,  whom  we  may  appoint 

*  It  has  been  supposed  by  many  that  the  phrase,  "serving 
tables,"  in  the  history  of  the  institution  of  the  Deacon's  office, 
had  a  reference  either  to  the  Lord's  table,  or  to  overseeing-  and 
supplying  the  tables  of  the  poor,  or  perhaps  both.  But  I  am 
inclined  to  believe  that  this  is  an  entire  mistake.  The  word, 
t£*t«£*,  sisrniGes,  indeed,  a  table;  but,  in  this  connexion,  it 
seems  obviousl  v,ttt  mean  a  money -table,  or  a  counter,  on  which 
money  was  laid.  Hence  ^i,T^T»r  a  money  changer,  or  money 
merchant.  See  JSlali.  xxi.  12.  xxv.  27  Mark  xi.  15  Luke  xix. 
23.  The  plain  meaning.  I  hen,  of  Acts  vi.  seems  to  be  (his; — 
*'  It  is  not  ^unable  that  we  should  leave  the  word  of  God,  and 
devote  ourselves  to  pecuniary  affairs." 


228  DIFFERENCE  BETWEEN 

over  this  business/'  i.e.  over  the  "  serving  of  tables.'* 
"And  we  will  give  ourselves  to  prayer  and  the  mi^ 
nistry  of  the  word."  Now,  to  suppose  that  these 
very  Deacons  were  appointed  to  officiate  in  "  the  ministry 
of  the  word  and  prayer/'  is  an  inconsistency,  nay  an  ab- 
surdity, so  glaring,  that  the  only  wonder  is  how  any  one 
can  possibly  adopt  itafter  reading  the  passage  in  question. 
If  the  object  had  been  to  adopt  a  supposition  fitted  to 
exhibit  the  Apostles,  and  the  "multitude"  too,  as  acting 
like  insane  men,  or  children,  one  more  directly  adapted 
to  answer  the  end,  could  not  have  been  thought  of. 

2.  The  circumstance  of  Philip,  sometime  after  his 
appointment  as  Deacon,  being  found  preaching  and 
baptizing,  in  Samaria,  and  other  places,  does  not 
■afford  the  smallest  presumptive  evidence  against  this 
conclusion.  Soon  after  his  appointment  to  the  diaconate 
in  Jerusalem,  the  members  of  the  Church  in  that  city 
were  chiefly  "scattered  abroad  by  persecution."  Philip 
was,  of  course,  driven  from  his  residence.  Now.  the 
probability  is,  that  about  this  time — seeing  he  was  a 
man  "full  of  the  Holy  Ghost  and  of  wisdom,"  and 
therefore,  eminently  qualified  to  be  useful  in  preaching 
the  gospel,  he  received  a  new  ordination  as  an  Evan- 
gelist, and  in  this  character  went  forth  to  preach  and 
baptize.  He  is  expressly  called  an  "Evangelist,"  by 
the  same  inspired  writer  who  gives  us  an  account  of  his 
appointment  as  a  Deacon ;  (Acts  xxi.  8).  Until  it  can  be 
proved,  then,  that  he  preached  and  baptized  as  a  Dea- 
con, and  not  as  an  Evangelist,  the  supposition  is 
utterly  improbable  and  altogether  worthless*  It  is  really 
an  imposition  on  credulity  to  urge  it.  And  that  cer- 
tainly never  can  be  proved  as  long  as  the  sixth  chapter 
of  the  Acts  of  the  Apostles  remains  a  part  of  the  inspired 
volume.     As  to  Stephen,  another  of  the  "seven,"  dis- 


EIDERS   AND   DEACONS,  229 

puling  with  gainsayers  in  private,  and  defending  him- 
self before  the  Council;  it  was  not  official  preaching 
at  all.  It  was  nothing  more  than  every  professing 
Christian  is  at  all  times  not  only  at  liberty,  but  under 
obligation  to  do,  when  assailed  by  unbelievers,  or  when 
brought  before  an  unjust  tribunal. 

The  truth  is,  the  practice  of  connecting  the  functions 
of  preaching  and  baptizing  with  the  Deacon's  office, 
is  one  of  the  various  human  inventions  which  early 
began  to  spring  up  in  the  Church,  and  which  turned 
almost  every  ecclesiastical  office  which  had  been  divinely 
instituted  more  or  less  from  its  primitive  character.  "But 
from  the  beginning  it  was  not  so."  It  is  a  departure 
from  the  apostolical  model.  We  find,  indeed,  in  several 
of  the  writers  of  the  first  three  or  four  centuries,  frequent 
intimations  of  Deacons  being  permitted  to  preach,  and 
administer  the  ordinance  of  baptism.  But  in  almost, 
every  instance,  it  is  represented  as  done  in  virtue  of  a 
specific  permission  from  the  Pastor  or  Bishop  in  each 
case,  and  as  entirely  unlawful  without  such  permission. 
A  very  different  thing  from  a  function  inherent  in  an 
office,  and  always  lawful  when  a  proper  occasion  for  its 
exercise  occurred !  In  fact,  ecclesiastical  history,  I  believe, 
will  bear  me  out  in  saying,  that,  within  the  first  three 
centuries,  it  would  be  just  as  correct  to  assert  that  private 
Christians  in  generafhad  a  right  to  preach  and  baptize, 
as  to  maintain  that  Deacons,  in  virtue  of  their  office  as 
such,  had  this  right,  because  we  meet  with  some  instan- 
ces of  their  being  both  called  upon  to  do  so  in  cases  of 
supposed  necessity,  or  when  specially  permitted  by 
superior  ecclesiastics.  Mr.  Bingham,  the  learned  Epis- 
copal antiquary,  explicitly  tells  us,  on  the  authority  of 
several  early  writers,  that  private  Christians,  who  sus- 
tained no  office  whatever  in  the  Church,  were  sometimes 

v 


230  DIFFERENCE  BETWEEN 

called  upon  to  address  the  people,  in  the  absence,  or  at 
the  special  request  of  him  whose  official  duty  it  was  to 
preach.     The  same  learned  author  goes  on  to  state, 
that;  in  the  apostolic  age,  or  as  long  as  the  special  gifts 
of  the  Holy  Spirit,  enabling  men  to  prophesy,  continued, 
all  who  possessed  such  special  gifts,  whether  in  office  or 
not,  might  use  "the  word  of  exhortation"  in  the  Church. 
"But  then,"  he  adds,  "as  such  extraordinary  gifts  of  the 
Spirit  of  prophecy,  were  in  a  manner  peculiar  to  the 
apostolical  age,  this  could  not  be  a  rule  to  the  following 
ages  of  the  Church.     And,  therefore,  when  once  these 
gifts  were  ceased,  the  Church  went  prudently  by  another 
rule,  to  allow  none  but  such  as  were  called  by  an  ordi- 
nary commission  to  perform  this  office,  except  where 
some  extraordinary  natural  endowments  (such  as  were 
in  Origen  before  his  ordination)  answering  in  some 
measure  to  those  special  gifts,  made  it  proper  to  grant  a 
license  to  laymen  to  exercise  their  talents  for  the  benefit 
of  the  Church.     Or  else,  when  necessity  imposed  the 
duty  on  Deacons,  to  perform  the  office  of  preaching, 
•when  the  Bishop  and  Presbyters  were  by  sickness,  or 
other  means,  debarred  from  it.  For  the  aforesaid  author 
[Ambrose)  plainly  says,  that  Deacons,  in  his  time,  were 
not  ordinarily  allowed  jwadicare  inpopulo,  i.  e.  preach 
to  the  people,  as  being  un  office  to  which  they  had  no 
ordinary  commission.     And  the  same  is  said  by  the 
author  of  the  Apostolical  Constitutions,  and  many 
others.     Therefore,  since  Deacons  were  not  allowed 
this  power,  but  only  in  some  special  cases ;  it  is  the  less 
to  be  wondered  at,  after  the  ceasing  of  spiritual  gifts, 
it  should,  generally,  be  denied  to  laymen."* 

A  mistake  on  this  point,  in  reference  to  the  Deacon's 

*  Bingham's  Origines  Ecclesiastica,  B.  14.  Ch.  4.  sect.  4. 


ELDERS  AND  DEACONS.  231 

office,  has  arisen  from  misinterpreting  certain  terms 
which  are  used  by  some  of  the  early  writers  to  express 
their  public  service.  The  words  xr]£uy{Aa,  x^|,  xrjpuo'o'w, 
&c.  are  frequently  used  in  the  New  Testament  to  express 
the  public  preacher,  and  preaching  of  the  gospel.  Now, 
when  the  same  words  are  applied  by  some  of  the  earlier 
Greek  Fathers,  and  the  corresponding  words,  praci, 
pradicatio  and  praidicare,  by  the  Latins,  to  the 
Deacon's  office,  it  has  been  hastily  concluded  that  they 
were,  habitually,  preachers,  in  the  New  Testament 
sense  of  the  term.  But  the  truth  is,  as  every  one  in  the 
least  degree  acquainted  with  those  writers,  knows,  these 
terms,  when  used  by  the  Fathers,  signify  an  entirely 
different  thing.  The  Deacons,  in  the  third,  fourth  and 
fifth  centuries,  are  every  where  represented  as  the 
common  heralds  or  criers  of  the  Church. — That  is, 
when  any  public  notice  was  to  be  given;  when  the 
catechumens  or  the  penitents  were  to  be  called  upon 
aloud  to  come  forward,  or  to  withdraw ;  or  when  any 
public  proclamation  was  to  be  made,  in  the  course  of 
the  service  in  the  Church; — it  belonged  to  the  Deacon's 
office  to  perform  this  duty.  Hence  he  was  called  the 
xr]£ug,  or  crier,  and  was  said  xypvatfsiv,  to  cry  aloud,  or 
make  proclamation.  It  belonged  to  the  Deacons, 
also,  to  keep  order  at  the  doors,  when  the  service  was 
beginning;  to  see  that  the  worshippers  were  seated  in 
a  quiet  and  orderly  manner;  to  stand  around  the 
communion  table,  when  it  was  spread,  and  with  fans 
made  either  of  dried  skins,  or  peacocks  feathers,  to  keep 
off  the  flies  from  the  consecrated  elements;  and,  after 
the  consecration  of  the  sacramental  elements,  to  bear 
them  to  the  communicants.  These,  and  a  variety  of 
subordinate  duties,  were  considered  as  pertaining  to  their 
office,  and  hence  they  were  regarded,  not  as  having  any 


132  DIFFERENCE  BETWEEN. 

part  of  the  priesthood,  according  to  the  language  of  that 
day;  but  as  being  the  ':  Church's  servants."    All  this  is 
so  explicitly  acknowledged,  and  so  abundantly  proved, 
by  the  learned  Bingham,  (Origines  Ecclesiastical, 
Book  ii.  Chap.  20,  and  Book  xiv.  Chap.  4,)  that  any 
further  enlargement  on  the  subject   is  altogether  unne- 
cessary.    The  original  office  of  the  Deacon  was  one  of 
high  trust  and  dignity;  requiring  much  piety,  wisdom, 
prudence  and  diligence.     But  when  the  purity  of  the 
Church,  both  in   doctrine  and  practice,  declined,  and 
especially,  when  the  ardor  of  her  charity  to  the  poor 
had  greatly  slackened,  that  officer,  having  little  to  do 
in  his  appropriate  department,  sunk,  for  a  time,  into  a 
kind  of  ecclesastical  menial. 

3.  The  directions  afterwards  given  by  Paul  to  Ti- 
mothy, (1  Tim.  iii.)  respecting  the  proper  qualifica- 
tions of  candidates  for  the  Deason's  office,  are  decisively 
opposed  to  the  view  of  the  subject  which  I  am  now 
examining.    When  the  Apostle  speaks  of  the  qualifica- 
tions indispensable  in  a  Teaching  Elder,  or  Bishop,  he 
says  he  must  not  only  be  grave,  pious,  and  of  good 
report,  but  also  "  apt  to  teach,"'  (fee.     But  he  pre- 
scribes no  such  condition  in  the  choice  of  Deacons.   He 
gives  no  intimation  that  teaching  made  any  part  of 
their  official  work.     It  is  said,  indeed,  that  they  ought 
to  be  men  "  holding  the  mystery  of  the  faith  in  a  pure 
conscience."    By  which  I  understand  to  be  meant,  that 
they  must  be  men  holding  the  true  faith  in  sincerity ; 
in  other  words,  that  they  must  be  orthodox,  and  pious; 
qualifications  which  ought  to  be  found  in  all  who  bear 
office  in  the  Church  of  God. 

4.  We  have  not  the  least  evidence,  from  any  source, 
that  the  function  of  government  was  ever  connected 
with  the  Deacon's  office.     We  read  of  Ruling  Elders; 


ELDERS  AND  DEACONS.  233 

but  never  of  Ruling  Deacons.     Among  all  the  multi- 
plied witnesses  drawn  from  the  Synagogue  and  the 
Church,  and  from  almost  all  denominations  of  Chris- 
tians, ancient  and  modern,  in  favor  of  a  bench  of  Elders 
in  each  congregation  for  conducting  its  government  and 
discipline,  I  recollect  no  example  of  the  members  of  that 
bench  being  called  Deacons,  or  of  Deacons  having  any- 
place among  them.     Nay,  it  is  perfectly  manifest,  that 
if,  according  to  the  scriptural  model,  there  ought  to  be  a 
bench  or  college,  made  up  of  a  plurality  of  Elders  in 
each  Church,  to  be  intrusted  with  the  inspection  and 
rule  of  the  whole  body;  then  there  is  not  a  shadow  of 
evidence  to  support  the  claim  of  the  Deacons  to  a  seat 
in  that  body.     But  if  such  a  bench  of  Rulers,  under 
the  name  of  Elders,  or  Presbyters,   be  given  up; 
then,  I  will  venture  to  assert,  there  is  not  a  shred  of 
evidence,  either  in  or  out  of  the  Bible,  that  similar 
powers  were  ever  assigned  to  Deacons,  as  such.     We 
may,  indeed,  call  our  Rulling  Elders,  by  the  name  of 
Deacons,  if  we  please.     And  so  we  may  call  them 
Dervises,  or  Imams,  with  the  Turks;  and  say  that 
we  mean  by  these  titles,  to  designate  the  members  of 
the  parochial  Presbytery,  or  Consistory,  in  each  Church. 
But  the  real  questions  which  present  themselves  for  so- 
lution are  such  as  these: — Is  it  agreeable  to  the  New 
Testament  model,  that  there  be  in  every  Christain 
congregation  a  plurality  of  pious  and   prudent   men, 
invested  with  the  office  of  inspection  and  government 
in  the  Church?     Or,  ought  all  ecclesiastical  authority 
and  discipline  to  be  exercised  by  the  Pastor  alone?     If 
the  former  be  admitted,  then,  ought  the  body  of  spiri- 
tual rulers  to  be  styled  Elders  or  Deacons?     If  the 
latter  name  be  contended  for,  as  the  more  scriptural, 
then  what  passage  of  Scripture,  or  of  early  uninspired 

u  2 


234;  DIFFERENCE  BETWEEN 

history,  can  be  mentioned,  which  countenances  the  ap~ 
plication  of  this  title  to  ecclesiastical  rulers,  as  such  1 
The  truth  is,  it  is  not  perceived  how  any  can  consis- 
tently maintain,  that  the  officers  whom  Presbyterians 
are  wont  to  call  Ruling  Elders,  are  really  Deacons,  and 
ought  to  be  so  designated,  without  abandoning  the 
Church  Session,,  as  destitute  of  all  scriptural  warrant. 
He  who  does  this,  however,  must  hold,  either  that  the 
Pastor  of  each  Church  has  the  whole  government  and 
discipline  in  his  own  hands,  and  that  the  persons  called 
Elders,  or  Lteatons,  are  only  a  set  of  convenient  ad- 
visers, without  any  rightful  judicial  authority;  or  that 
all  authority  ought  to  be  exercised  by  the  body  of  the 
communicants,  and  every  question  of  admission  or  dis- 
cipline submitted  to  their  vote.     In  the  latter  case,  he 
may  be  a  very  pious  and  excellent  Independent ;  but 
he  has  no  claim  to  the  character  of  a  Presbyterian. 

It  is  deeply  to  be  regretted,  that  the  office  of  Deacon^ 
in  its  true  nature,  and  its  highly  important  and  scrip- 
tural character,  is  not  to  be  found  in  many  Presbyterian 
Churches.  In  some,  this  office  is  wholly  dropped, 
Neither  the  name  nor  the  thing  is  to  be  found  in  them, 
In  others,  the  Ruling  Elders,,  or  the  members  of  the 
Church  Session,  are  constantly  styled  Deacons,  and 
scarcely  ever  designed  by  any  other  title;  while  the 
office  really  indicated  in  Scripture  by  that  title  is  not 
retained.  And'  in  a  third  class  of  our  Churches,  those 
who  are  meant  for  real  Deacons,  that  is,  who  are 
chosen  and  set  apart  as  such,  as-  well  as  called  by  that 
name,  are  employed  in  functions  for  which  the  office  of 
Deacon  was  never  instituted.  The  cases,  it  is  feared^ 
are  few  m  which  the  offices  of  Elder  and  Deacon  are 
both  retained  ?  and  the  appropriate  functions  of  each 
distinctly  maintained. 


ELDERS   AND   DEACONS.  235 

Perhaps  in  a  majority  of  our  Churches  the  office  of 
Deacon,  strictly  so  called  is  entirely  dropped.  This,  it 
is  believed,  is  also  virtually  the  case,  to  a  considerable 
extent  in  the  Church  of  Scotland r,  and  among  the  large 
and  respectable  body  of  Presbyterians  in  the  North  of 
Ireland.  The  origin  of  this  extensive  disuse  of  an  un- 
questionable scriptural  office,  is  probably  to  be  traced  to 
the  peculiar  form  of  the  provision  made  in  some  coun- 
tries for  the  support  of  the  poor,  which  was  supposed  to 
render  the  deaconship,  as  a  separate  office,  unnecessary, 
Deacons  had  a  place  in  the  original  organization  of  the 
Protestant  Church  of  Scotland;  and,  for  many  yeare 
after  the  Reformation,  were  universally  retained  and 
much  employed  in  that  Church,  as  a  distinct  class  of 
officers.  But,  in  later  times  the  office  has  either  been 
suffered  to  fall  into  disuetude  altogether,  or,  as  is  more 
common,  has  been  united  with  that  of  Ruling  Elder, 
in  the  same  individuals.  So  that  the  Ruling  Elders 
in  the  Church  of  Scotland,  are  generally  expected,  and 
undertake,  to  act  as  Deacons  also.  The  same  arrange- 
ment it  is  believed,  is  also  generally  adopted  among  the 
Presbyterians  in  Ireland, 

As  to  those  Churches  in  our  own  country  in  which 
the  office  of  Deacon  has  been  suffered  to  fall  into  disuse 
altogether,  this  event  is  certainly,  on  a  variety  of  ac- 
counts, to  be  regretted: — among  others,  for  the  following 
reasons : 

1.  Every  scriptural  precedent  is  worthy  of  serious 
tegard.  The  office  of  Deacon  was  evidently  brought 
into  the  Church  by  inspired  men.  And  although  it  is 
not  contended  that  it  is  essential  to  an  organized 
Church  to  have  officers  of  this  class,  inasmuch  as  the 
Church,  undoubtedly,  did  without  them,  for  a  short 
time,  after  its  first  organization ;  yet  as  the  office  is  an 


236  DIFFERENCE   BETWEEN 

institution  of  infinite  wisdom,  and  necessary  to  a  full 
array  of  all  the  officers  which  belong  to  the  visible 
Church,  it  seems  expedient  to  retain  it,  in  all  cases  in 
which  it  is  possible. 

2.  We  know  that,  in  every  Jewish  Synagogue,  before 
the  coming  of  Christ,  there  was  a  class  of  officers  whose 
peculiar  duty  it  was  to  collect  and  dispense  the  monies 
contributed  for  the  support  of  the  poor.  This  seems  to 
have  been  an  invariable  part  of  the  Synagogue  system. 
And  as  that  system  was  evidently  the  model  on  which 
the  Christian  Church  was  formed,  we  may  presume 
that  a  feature  of  it  so  strongly  recommended  by  age  and 
experience,  is  worthy  of  adoption. 

3.  Although  some  Churches  may  plead  in  excuse 
for  discontinuing  the  use  of  this  office,  that  they  have 
no  Church  poor,  and,  therefore,  no  occasion  for  the  ap- 
propriate services  of  Deacons ;  yet  the  question  is,  ought 
they  to  allow  this  to  be  the  case?  What  though  the 
laws  of  the  State  make  provision  of  a  decent  kind  for 
all  the  poor?  Are  there  not  commonly  within  the 
bounds,  and  even  among  the  communicants,  of  every 
Church  of  any  extent,  and  of  the  ordinary  standing  in 
point  of  age,  generally  found  a  greater  or  less  number 
of  persons  who  have  seen  more  comfortable  days,  but 
are  now  reduced ; — aged  widows;  persons  of  delicate, 
retiring  spirits,  who  are  struggling  with  the  most  severe 
privations  of  poverty  in  secret,  but  cannot  bring  them- 
selves to  apply  to  the  civil  officer  for  aid  as  paupers; 
who,  at  the  same  time,  would  be  made  comparatively 
comfortable  by  a  pittance  now  and  then  administered 
in  the  tender  and  affectionate  spirit  of  the  gospel?  Now, 
ought  the  Church  to  take  no  measures  for  searching 
out  such  members,  who  are  not  and  cannot  be  reached 
by  the  legal  provision,  and  kindly  ministering  to  their 


ELDERS   AND   DEACONS.  237 

comfort?  But  if  there  be  no  class  of  officers  whose 
appropriate  duty  it  is  to  make  this  whole  concern  an 
object  of  their  attention,  it  will  too  often  be  neglected, 
and  thus  the  interest  of  Christian  charity  seriously 
suffer.  It  is  not  a  sufficient  answer  to  this  argument 
to  say,  as  those  who  philosophize  on  the  subject  of 
pauperism,  say,  and,  to  a  certain  extent,  with  great 
truth,  that  this  very  provision  would  probably  invite 
application,  and  perhaps,  in  some  instances,  induce  im- 
proper reliance  upon  it,  to  the  neglect  of  economy  and 
diligence.  Supposing  this,  in  some  degree,  to  be  the 
case;  would  it  not  be  better  to  relieve  some  portion  of  the 
poverty  brought  on  by  improvidence,  than  to  allow 
humble,  tender  piety  to  pine  in  secret,  unpitied,  and 
unrelieved,  under  the  pressure  of  that  helpless  penury, 
which  was  induced  by  the  hand  of  a  sovereign  God? 
Nay,  is  no  pity,  no  active  sympathy  due  from  the 
Church  even  to  indigence  notoriously  induced  by  sin? 
The  considerations  which  have  been  suggested,  furnish, 
indeed,  a  good  argument  for  having  Deacons  of  suitable 
character; — men  of  piety,  wisdom,  benevolence,  prac- 
tical acquaintance  with  the  world,  and  with  human 
nature,  who  would  be  likely  to  perform  their  duty  with 
discernment, prudence,  and  unfeigned  Christian  charity, 
cautiously  guarding  against  the  evils  to  which  the 
relief  they  are  commissioned  to  bear  is  exposed;  but 
no  argument  at  all  against  affording  such  relief  when 
really  needed. 

4.  It  is  a  great  error  to  suppose  that  Deacons  cannot 
be  appropriately  and  profitably  employed  in  various  other 
ways  besides  ministering  to  the  poor  of  the  Church. 
They  might,  with  great  propriety  be  made  the  mana- 
gers of  all  the  money-tables,  or  fiscal  concerns  of  each 
congregation;  and,  for  this  purpose,  might  be  incorpora- 


238  DIFFERENCE  BETWEEN 

ted,  if  it  were  thought  necessary,  by  law,  that  they  might 
be  enabled  regularly  to  hold  and  employ  all  the  property, 
real  and  personal,  of  the  Church.     But,  even  if  it  were 
thought  inexpedient  that  boards  of  Deacons  should  be 
allowed  thus  to  supersede  the  boards   of  "Trustees," 
which  are,  at  present,  commonly  employed  to  manage 
each  ecclesiastical  treasury ;  still  there  are  very  important 
services  in  reference  to  pecuniary  concerns,  which  they 
might  manage,  and  which,  it  is  believed,  would  be 
greatly  beneficial  to  the  Church  if  they  were  considered 
as  at  all  times  bound  to  manage,  and  should  actually 
manage  with  wisdom,  energy  and  zeal.     I  refer  to  the 
Church's  contributions  to  the  various  great  objects  of 
Christian  enterprise  which  distinguish  the  present  day. 
That  these  contributions  to  the   cause  of  the  Bible; 
of  Missions,  foreign  and  domestic;  of  Sabbath  Schools; 
and  of  the   various  other  Christian   and   benevolent 
undertakings   for   promoting   knowledge,   virtue    and 
happiness,  temporal  and  eternal,  among  men,  ought  to 
be  continued,  and  greatly  increased, — no  one  who  looks 
into  the  Bible,  or  who  knows  any  thing  of  the  Christian 
spirit,  can  for  a  moment  doubt.     It  is  quite  evident, 
too,  that  these  contributions  ought  to  be  perfectly  volun- 
tary, and  that  any  attempt  to  render  them  otherwise, 
would    be   both   unscriptural   and    mischievous.     But 
would  it  not  tend  to  render  the  whole  business  of  libe- 
rality to  the  cause  of  Christ  more  regular,  more  easy, 
more  abundant,  and  ultimately  more  productive,  if  it 
were  placed  under  the  enlightened  advice,  and  wise 
management  of  six  or  eight  Deacons  in  each  Church? 
Suppose  the  Pastor  and  the  Elders  of  every  congrega- 
tion to  be  animated  with  a  proper  spirit  on  this  subject, 
and  to  be  habitually  uttering  and  diffusing  proper  sen- 
timents; and  suppose  the  whole  business  of  collecting' 


ELDERS   AND    DEACONS.  239 

the  contributions,  and  paying  them  over  to  the  respective 

treasuries  for  which  they  were  destined,  were  devolved 
on  the  Deacons,  as  an  executive  board,  who  might  call 
to  their  aid,  and  would  really  confer,  as  well  as  receive 
a  benefit,  by  calling  to  their  aid,  in  the  details  of  collec- 
tion, a  number  of  active,  pious  sub-agents?  Can  any 
one  doubt  that  the  contributions  of  the  Churches  would 
be  more  systematic,  more  regular,  more  conveniently 
received,  better  proportioned,  and  a  part,  at  least,  and, 
in  some  cases,  a  large  part,  of  the  expenses  paid  to 
travelling  agents,  saved  for  the  cause  of  Christ?  The 
truth  is,  an  enlightened,  active,  pious  board  of  Deacons 
might  place  this  whole  subject  on  such  a  footing,  and 
when  they  had  gotten  it  fairly  arranged,  and  under  way, 
might  manage  it  in  such  a  manner,  as  without  adding 
in  the  least  degree  to  the  burdens  of  the  people,  would 
render  their  contributions  more  productive,  as  well  as 
more  easy  and  economical  in  every  part  of  their  ma- 
nagement. 

With  respect  to  the  mode  of  disposing  of  the  Deacon's 
office  adopted  extensively  in  our  sister  Churches  of 
Scotland  and  Ireland*  and  in  a  few  instances, in  this 
country,  namely,  laying  it  on  the  Ruling  Elders,  and 
uniting  both  offices  in  the  same  individual — it  is,  un- 
doubtedly, liable  to  very  strong  objections,  as  will  appear 
from  the  following  considerations. 

1.  One  office  is  quite  enough  to  be  borne  by  the  same 
person;  especially  an  office  so  important,  so  responsible, 
so  abundantly  sufficient  to  employ  the  heart,  the  hands. 


*  The  same  mixture  of  offices  has  also  long  existed,  it  is 
believed,  in  the  Church  of  Geneva.  See  Le  Mercier's,  Ch. 
Hist,  of  Gen.  p.  214. 


240  DIFFERENCE   BETWEEN 

and  the  time  of  the  most  active  and  zealous,  as  that  of 
the  Ruling  Elder.  However  pious,  wise,  and  unwearied 
he  may  be,  he  will  find  the  work  pertaining  to  his  office 
as  Elder,  enough,  and  more  than  enough,  especially  in 
this  day  of  enlarged  Christian  activity,  to  put  in  requi- 
sition all  his  powers.  Why,  then,  add  another  office  to 
one  already  occupied,  if  he  be  faithful,  to  the  utmost 
extent  of  his  faculties?  Similar  remarks  may  be  made, 
to  a  considerable  extent,  concerning  the  Deacon's  office. 
It  is  enough,  when  faithfully  discharged,  to  occupy  all 
the  leisure  time  of  the  most  active  and  faithful  incum- 
bent. Both  certainly  cannot  be  undertaken  by  the  same 
individual,  without  some  of  the  duties  pertaining  to  one 
or  the  other  being  neglected. 

2.  Where  there  are  suitable  candidates  for  office 
among  the  communicants  of  a  Church,  it  is  commonly 
wise  to  distribute  offices  as  extensively  among  them  as 
circumstances  will  conveniently  admit.  If,  indeed,  there 
be  a  dearth  of  proper  materials  for  making  ecclesiastical 
officers,  the  difficulty  must  be  surmounted  in  the  best 
way  that  is  practicable.  But  if  there  be  individuals 
enough  to  sustain  it,  the  diffusion  of  office  power  among 
a  considerable  number,  is  so  far  from  being  an  evil,  that 
it  is  manifestly,  and  may  be  highly,  advantageous.  It 
brings  a  greater  number  to  take  an  interest  in  the  affairs 
of  the  Church.  It  makes  a  greater  number  intimately 
acquainted  with  the  concerns  of  the  Church.  And  by 
calling  a  greater  number  to  pray,  and  speak  and  act  in 
behalf  of  the  Church,  it  tends  to  promote  the  spiritual, 
and,  it  may  be,  the  everlasting  benefit  of  them  and 
their  children.  Why,  then,  heap  a  plurality  of  offices 
upon  a  single  person?  It  is  depriving  the  Church  of  a 
manifest  advantage ;  and  may  be  the  means  of  depri- 


ELDERS   AND   DEACONS.  241 

vinff  the  individuals  themselves  of  both  comfort  and 
edification. 

3.  If  there  be  not  an  absolute  incompatibility  be- 
tween the  offices  of  Ruling  Elder  and  Deacon,  there  is 
at  least,  such  an  interference  between  their  respective 
duties,  as  is  certainly  undesirable,  and  ought  by  all 
means  to  be  avoided.  There  is  a  collision  in  this  case 
analagous  to  that  which  takes  place  when  a  man  visits 
the  sick  in  the  double  character  of  a  physician  and 
minister  of  the  Gospel.  For  although,  in  many  cases, 
the  duties  and  services  of  each  character  may  happily 
harmonize,  and  help  one  another ;  yet,  perhaps,  in 
many  more,  it  will  appear  to  the  discerning  eye  that 
they  had  better  be  separated.  When  an  Elder,  as  such, 
goes  forth  to  the  discharge  of  his  official  duties,  it  is  to 
promote  the  spiritual  interest  of  the  flock  of  which  he 
is  made  one  of  the  "overseers."  To  this  purpose  it  is 
important  that  he  should  have  the  most  unreserved  and 
confidential  access  to  all  the  members  of  the  flock,  and 
their  children;  and  that  nothing  should  be  allowed  to 
intervene  which  was  adapted  to  disguise  the  feelings,  to 
divide  the  attention,  or  to  clog  the  operations  of  either 
party.  But  if,  when  this  Elder  visits  the  poor  for  the 
sake  of  benefitting  their  souls,  they  receive  him  w7ith 
smiles,  with  apparent  cordiality,  and  with  much  pious 
talk,  chiefly  for  the  concealed  purpose  of  increasing  the 
allowance  which,  as  Deacon,  he  may  be  disposed  to 
minister  to  them: — or,  when  he  visits  them  as  a  Dea- 
con, they  feel  jealous,  or  alienated,  on  account  of  some 
supposed  deficiency  in  that  allowance,  and,  of  course, 
in  some  measure  close  their  minds  against  him  as  their 
spiritual  guide : — or,  when  the  mind  of  the  Presbyter- 
Deacon  himself  becomes  divided  and  perplexed  between 
the  rival  claims  of  these  two  classes  of  duties,  less  good 


242  DIFFERENCE  BETWEEN 

is  done;  less  pure  unmingled  feeling  exercised;  and 
less  comfort  enjoyed  on  either  side.* 

On  all  these  accounts,  the  two  offices  in  question,  as 
they  are  entirely  different  in  their  nature,  ought,  un- 
doubtedly, to  be  separated  in  practice,  to  be  discharged 
by  different  persons,  and  to  be  carefully  guarded  against 
that  interference  which  is  adapted  to  render  both  less 
useful. 

We  are  led,  then,  by  the  foregoing  facts  and  argu- 
ments, to  the  following  conclusions: — 

1.  That  the  Deacon  is  a  divinely  instituted  officer, 
and  ought  to  be  retained  in  the  Church. 

2.  That  the  function  to  which  the  Deacon  was  ap- 
pointed by  the  Apostles,  was  to  manage  the  pecuniary 
affairs  of  the  Church,  and  especially  to  preside  over 
the  collections  and  disbursements  for  the  poor. 

3.  That  Deacons,  therefore,  ought  not  only  to  be  men 
of  piety,  but  also  of  judgment,  prudence,  knowledge  of 
the  world,  and  weight  of  character. 

4.  That  preaching  was  not,  in  the  primitive  Church, 
any  part  of  the  Deacon's  duty,  but  came  in,  among 
other  human  innovations,  as  corruption  gained  ground. 

5.  That  there  is  no  warrant  whatever  for  assigning 
to  Deacons  the  function  of  government  in  the  Church; 
and  that  their  undertaking  any  such  function,  is 
nothing  less  than  ecclesiastical  usurpation. 

6.  That  confounding  the  office  of  Deacon  with  that 
of  Ruling  Elder,  is  an  unwarranted  confusion,  both  of 
names  and  offices,  which  are  entirely  distinct. 

7.  That  even  the  uniting  of  these  two  offices  in  the 

*  See  this  subject  treated  in  a  striking  manner,  and  at  con- 
siderable length,  in  Dr.  Chalmers'  Christian  and  Civic  Eco- 
nomy of  Large  Towns.     Vol.  i.  Chapter  vii. 


ELDERS   AND  DEACONS.  243 

same  persons,  is  by  no  means  advisable,  and  tends  ma- 
terially to  impair  the  comfort  and  usefulness  of  both. 

8.  That  Deacons  ought  to  be  ordained  by  the  im- 
position of  hands.  In  this  ordination  the  hands  of  the 
Pastor  and  of  the  Eldership  ought  to  be  laid  on.  I 
know  not  the  shadow  of  a  reason  why  this  solemnity 
should  be  omitted.  The  venerable  Dr.  Dwight,  in  his 
System  of  Theology,  when  treating  on  the  office  of 
Deacons,  unequivocally  declares  his  conviction  that  the 
laying  on  of  hands  ought  always  to  be  employed  in 
setting  them  apart;  and  pronounces  the  omission  of  it 
to  be  ':  incapable,  so  far  as  he  knows,  of  any  defence." 
The  disregard  of  scriptural  example  in  the  omission,  is 
as  painful,  as  it  is  obvious  and  unquestionable. 

9.  That  the  Deacons,  although  they  ought  always, 
if  possible,  to  be  present  at  the  meetings  of  the  Church 
Session,  for  the  sake  of  giving  information,  and  aiding 
in  counsel,  can  have  no  vote  as  Church  Rulers ;  and, 
therefore,  cannot  give  their  vote  in  the  admission  or 
exclusion  of  members,  or  in  any  case  of  ecclesiastical 
discipline. 


CHAPTER  XI» 

THE  QUALIFICATIONS   PROPER  FOR  THIS  OFFICE 

The  account  which  has  been  given  of  the  nature 
and  duties  of  the  office  of  Ruling  Elder,  is  adapted  to 
reflect  much  light  on  the  qualifications  by  which  he 
who  bears  it  ought  to  be  distinguished.  Those  who 
are  called  to  such  extensive,  interesting  and  highly 
important  spiritual  duties ;  duties  which  enter  so  deeply 
into  the  comfort  and  edification  of  the  Church  of  God ; — 
it  surely  requires  no  formal  argument  to  show,  ought 
to  possess  a  character  in  some  degree  corresponding 
with  the  sphere  in  which  they  are  appointed  to  move. 
There  cannot  be  a  plainer  dictate  of  common  sense. 
Yet  to  attempt  a  brief  sketch  of  the  more  important  of 
the  qualifications  demanded  for  this  office,  may  not  be 
altogether  unprofitable. 

And  here,  it  may  be  observed,  in  the  outset,  that  it  is 
by  no  means  necessary  that  Ruling  Elders  should  be 
aged  persons.  For  although  it  cannot  be  doubted  that 
the  title  is,  literally,  expressive  of  age;  and  although  it 
is  equally  certain,  that,  originally,  the  office  was  gene- 
rally conferred  on  men  somewhat  advanced  in  life,  as 
being  most  likely,  other  things  being  equal,  to  possess 
wisdom,  prudence,  experience,  and  weight  of  charac- 
ter;— yet  the  term,  from  a  very  early  period,  came  to  be 
a  mere  title  of  office,  without  any  respect  to  the  years 


THIS  OFFICE.  245 

of  the  individual  who  bore  it.  This  is  evident,  not  only 
from  the  history  of  Jewish  practice,  but  also  from  the 
statements  of  the  New  Testament.  If  Timothy  was 
not  merely  a  Ruling,  but  also  a  Teaching  Elder,  though 
so  young  a  man,  that  thje  Apostle  said,  to  him, — Let 
no  man  despise  thy  youth;  and  if,  in  every  age  of  the 
Church,  young  men  have  been  considered  as  qualified 
on  the  score  of  age,  to  be  Elders  that  labor  in  the 
word  and  doctrine,  as  well  as  rule;  there  can  be  no 
doubt  that  young  men,  if  otherwise  well  qualified,  may 
with  propriety  be  appointed  Elders  to  assist  in  ruling 
the  Church  of  God.  Nay,  where  such  persons,  with 
other  suitable  qualifications  are  to  be  found,  it  is  ex- 
pedient to  introduce  some  in  younger  life  into  the 
Eldership  of  every  Church,  not  only  that  there  may  be 
individuals  in  the  body  fitted  for  more  active  duties; 
but  also  that  some  of  the  number  may  have  that  kind  of 
official  training,  and  that  familiarity  with  ecclesiastical 
business,  which  early  experience,  and  long  habit  alone 
can  give. 

It  may  be  remarked,  however,  that,  although  neither 
Scripture,  nor  the  Constitution  of  the  Presbyterian 
Church,  prescribes  any  absolute  rule  with  respect  to  the 
age  of  those  who  may  be  considered  as  candidates  for 
the  Eldership;  yet  it  is  very  manifest,  that  those  who 
are  either  minors  in  age,  or  "novices"  in  the  Christian 
character  and  profession,  ought  by  no  means,  in  ordi- 
nary circumstances,  to  be  elected  to  this  office.  In  the 
Church  of  Scotland,  the  rule  is,  that  no  one  can  be 
chosen  an  Elder  who  is  not  twenty-one  years  of  age. 
A  similar  regulation,  it  is  believed,  exists  in  some  other 
foreign  Churches;  and  it  may  be  considered  as  a  dictate, 
of  common  prudence. 

But,  though  the  circumstance  of  age,  as  a  general 

x2 


246  "qualifications  for 

rule,  does  not  enter  into  the  essential  qualifications  of 
Ruling  Elders ;  there  are  other  qualifications  which  are 
highly  important,  and,  indeed,  indispensable.  These  are 
stated  by  the  inspired  Apostle,  in  writing  to  Ti?nothy,  in 
the  following  comprehensive,  and  pointed  language : — 
An  Elder  must  be  blameless,  the  husband  of  one 
wife,  having  faithful  children;  one  that  ruleth  well 
his  own  house,  having  his  children  in  subjection 
with  all  gravity;  not  accused  of  riot,  or  unruly; 
not  self-willed;  not  soon  angry;  not  given  to  wine; 
no  striker;  not  given  to  filthy  lucre;  but  a  lover  of 
hospitality;  a  lover  of  good  men;  sober,  just,  holy: 
temperate,  sound  in  the  faith,  in  charity,  in  patience. 
See  Timothy  iii.  compared  with  Titus  i.  6 — 8,  and  ii. 
2,  which  passages  evidently  appear,  on  tracing  the 
connexion,  to.be  equally  applicable  to  Teaching  and 
Ruling. 

The  design  of  appointing  persons  to  the  office  of 
Ruling  Elder  is,  not  to  pay  them  a  compliment;  not 
to  give  them  an  opportunity  of  figuring  as  speakers  in 
judicatories;  not  to  create  the  pageants  of  ecclesiastical 
ceremony ;  but  to  secure  able,  faithful  and  truly  devoted 
counsellors  and  rulers  of  the  Church.  To  obtain  wise  and 
efficient  guides,  who  shall  not  only  go  along  with  the  flock 
in  their  journey  heavenward,  but  go  before  them  in 
every  thing  that  pertains  to  Christian  duty. 

It  aannot  be  doubted,  indeed,  that  every  member  of 
the  Christian  Church  is  bound  to  exhibit  a  holy,  devout 
and  exemplary  life ;  to  have  his  mind  well  stored  with 
religious  knowledge;  to  be  able  to  give  an  answer  to 
every  one  that  asketh  a  reason  of  the  hope  that  is  in 
him;  and  to  avoid  every  thing  that  is  criminal  in  itself, 
that  may  be  just  cause  of  offence  to  his  brethren,  or  that 
may  have  even  the  appearance  of  evil.    But  it  is  equally 


THIS  OFFICE.  247 

manifest  that  all  these  qualifications  are  still  more  im- 
portant, and  required  in  a  still  higher  degree,  in  those 
who  are  intrusted  with  the  spiritual  inspection  and 
regulation  of  the  Church.  As  they  occupy  a  place  of 
more  honor  and  authority  than  the  other  members  of 
the  Church;  so  they  also  occupy  a  station  of  greater 
responsibility.  The  eyes  of  hundreds  will  be  upon 
them  as  Elders,  which  were  not  upon  them  as  private 
Christians.  Their  brethren  and  sisters  over  whom 
they  are  placed  in  the  Lord,  will  naturally  look  up  to 
them  for  advice,  for  instruction,  for  aid  in  the  spiritual 
life,  and  for  a  shining  example.  The  expectation  is 
reasonable,  and  ought  not  to  be  disappointed.  The 
qualifications  of  Elders,  therefore,  ought,  in  some  good 
measure,  to  correspond  with  it. 

1.  An  Elder,  then,  ought,  first  of  all,  to  be  a  man 

OF    UNFEIGNED    AND    APPROVED    PIETY.       It  is  tO  be 

regretted  when  the  piety  of  any  member  of  the  Church- 
is  doubtful,  or  evidently  feeble  and  wavering.  It  is 
deplorable  when  any  who  name  the  name  of  Christ 
manifest  so  much  indecision  in  their  profession;  so 
much  timidity  and  unsteadiness  in  their  resistance  to 
error  and  sin;  so  much  conformity  to  the  world;  and 
so  little  of  that  undaunted,  ardent,  and  thorough  ad- 
herence to  their  professed  principles; — as  to  leave  it 
dubious  with  many,  whether  they  are  "on  the  Lord's 
side"  or  not.  But  how  much  more  deplorable  when  any 
thing  of  this  kind  appears  in  those  who  are  appointed 
to  watch,  to  preside,  and  to  exert  an  extensive  influence, 
over  a  portion  of  the  family  of  Christ!  What  is  to  be 
expected,  when  "watchmen  on  the  walls  of  Zion;n — 
for  such  Ruling  Elders  are  undoubtedly  to  be  regarded — 
appear  as  beacons^  to  warn  private  Christians  of  what 
ought  to  be  avoided,  rather  than  as  models,  to  guide,  to 


248  QUALIFICATIONS   FOR 

attract,  and  to  cheer  them  on  to  all  that  is  spiritual,  and 
holy,  and  becoming  the  gospel? 

Can  he  who  is  either  destitute  of  piety,  or  who  has 
but  a  small  portion  of  it,  engage  in  the  arduous  and 
deeply  spiritual  duties  of  the  Ruling  Elder,  with  comfort 
to  himself,  or  with  any  reasonable  hope  of  success?  It 
cannot  be  supposed.  To  fit  ecclesiastical  Rulers  for 
acting  in  their  appropriate  character,  and  for  performing 
the  work  which  pertains  to  it,  with  cordial  diligence, 
faithfulness  and  perseverance,  will  require  cordial  and 
decisive  attachment  to  the  service  of  the  Church ;  minds 
intent  upon  the  work ;  hearts  filled  with  love  to  Jesus, 
and  to  the  souls  of  men;  and  prefering  Jerusalem 
above  their  chief  joy.  Unless  the)7  are  animated  with 
this  affectionate  interest  in  their  work ;  unless  they  are 
habitually  impelled  by  an  enlightened  and  cordial 
attachment  to  the  great  cause  in  which  they  are  en- 
gaged, they  will  soon  become  weary  of  tlieir  arduous  and 
self-denying  labors;  they  will  find  waiting  on  the  flock, 
visiting  and  praying  with  the  sick,  instructing  the  serious 
and  inquiring,  correcting  the  disorderly,  watching  over 
the  spiritual  interests  of  all,  and  attending  the  various 
judicatories  of  the  Church,  an  irksome  task.  But  with 
such  a  zeal  as  has  been  described,  they  will  be  ready  to 
contend  for  the  truth,  to  engage  in  the  most  self-denying 
duties,  nay,  to  "  spend  and  be  spent,"  for  Christ.  To 
promote  the  best  interests  of  Zion  will  be  their  "meat 
and  drink."  No  labors,  no  trials,  no  difficulties  will 
move  them;  neither  will  they  count  their  lives  dear 
unto  themselves,  so  that  they  may  finish  their  course 
with  joy,  and  accomplish  the  work  which  they  have 
received  of  the  Lord  Jesus.  A  few  such  Elders  in 
every  Church,  would,  with  the  divine  blessing,  do  more 
to  silence  infidelity, — to  strike  even  the  scomer  dumbr — 


THIS  OFFICE.  249 

to  promote  the  triumph  of  gospel  truth, — and  to  rouse, 
sustain  and  bear  forward  the  cause  of  vital  piety,  than 
hundreds,  of  those  Ministers  and  Elders,  who  act  as  if 
they  supposed  that  supplying  the  little  details  of  an  eccle 
siastical  formality  was  the  whole  purpose  of  their  official 
appointment.  And,  in  truth,  we  have  no  reason  to 
expect,  in  general,  that  the  piety  of  the  mass  of  members 
in  any  Church,  will  rise  much  higher  than  that  of  their 
Rulers  and  Guides.  Where  the  latter  are  either  lifeless 
formalists,  or,  at  best,  but  "babes  in  Christ,"  we  shall 
rarely  find  many  under  their  care  of  more  vitality,  or,  of 
superior  stature. 

2.  Next  to  piety,  it  is  important  that  a  Ruling  Elder 
be  possessed  of  good  sense,  and  sound  judgment. 
Without  this  he  will  be  wholly  unfit  to  act  in  the  vari- 
ous difficult  and  delicate  cases  which  may  arise  in  the 
discharge  of  his  duty.  A  man  of  weak  and  childish 
mind,  however  fervent  his  piety,  is  by  no  means  adapted 
to  the  station  of  an  ecclesiastical  Ruler,  counsellor  and 
guide.  He  who  bears  the  office  in  question,  is  called 
to  have  intercourse  with  all  classes  of  people ;  to  engage 
in  the  most  arduous  and  trying  duties ;  and  to  deliberate 
and  decide  on  some  of  the  most  perplexing  questions 
that  can  come  before  the  human  mind.  Can  it  be 
doubted  that  good  sense,  and  solid  judgment  are  indis- 
pensible  to  the  due  discharge  of  such  official  work  as 
this?  How  would  a  judge  on  the  bench,  or  a  magis- 
trate in  his  office,  be  likely  to  get  along  without  this 
qualification  ?  Much  more  important  is  it,  if  possible, 
that  the  ecclesiastical  Ruler  be  enlightened  and  judi- 
cious; because  he  deliberates  and  decides  on  more 
momentous  subjects;  and  because  he  has  no  other  than 
moral  power  with  which  to  enforce  his  decisions. 
jyioses,  therefore,  spoke  the  language  of  good  sense,  as 


250  QUALIFICATIONS  FOR 

well  as  of  inspired  wisdom,  when  he  said  to  the  people 
of  Israel  (Dent.  i.  13.)  Take  ye  wise  men,  and 
understanding,  and  known  among  your  tribes, 
and  Iioill  make  them  Rulers  over  you.  This  point, 
indeed,  it  would  seem,  can  scarcely  be  made  more  plain 
than  common  sense  makes  it;  and  might,  therefore,  be 
considered  as  foreclosing  all  illustration;  did  not  some 
Churches  appear  disposed  to  make  the  experiment,  how 
far  infinite  wisdom  is  to  be  believed,  when  it  pronounces, 
by  the  Prophet,  a  woe  against  those  who  make  choice 
of  babes  to  rule  over  them. 

3.  A  Ruling  Elder  ought  to  be  sound  in  the  faith, 

AND     WELL     INFORMED     IN     RELATION    TO     GOSPEL 

truth.  The  Elder  who  is  not  orthodox  in  his  creed, 
instead  of  contributing,  as  he  ought,  to  build  up  the 
Church  in  the  knowledge  and  love  of  the  truth,  will,  of 
course,  be  the  means  of  scattering  error,  as  far  as  his 
influence  extends.  And  he  who  is  not  well  informed 
on  the  subject  of  Christian  doctrine,  will  not  know 
whether  he  is  promoting  the  one  or  the  other.  Ac- 
cordingly, when  this  class  of  officers  is  ordained  in  our 
Church,  we  call  upon  them  to  do  what  we  do  not  re- 
quire from  the  private  members  of  the  Church,  viz.r 
solemnly  and  publicly  to  adopt  the  Confession  of  Faith, 
"as  containing  the  system  of  doctrine  taught  in  the 
Holy  Scriptures."  When  this  is  considered;  and  also 
that  they  are  expected  to  be,  to  a  certain  extent,  instruc- 
tors and  guides  in  divine  things  to  many  of  those  com- 
mitted to  their  oversight;  and,  above  all,  that  they  will 
be  often  called  to  deliberate  on  charges  of  heresy,  as  well 
as  immorality;  and  to  sit  in  judgment  on  the  doctrinal 
belief,  not  only  of  candidates  for  admission  into  the 
Church,  as  private  members;  but  also  on  cases  of 
alleged  aberration  from  the  truth  in  ministers  of  the 


THIS  OFFICE.  251 

gospel;  the  necessity  of  their  being  "sound  in  the 
faith,"  and  of  their  having  enlightened  and  clear  views 
of  the  system  of  revealed  truth,  is  too  plain  to  need 
argument  for  its  support. 

The  truth  is,  the  Ruling  Elder  who  is  active,  zealous 
and  faithful,  will  have  occasion,  almost  every  day,  to 
discriminate  between  truth  and  error :  to  act  as  a 
guardian  of  the  Church's  orthodoxy;  to  pass  his  judg- 
ment, either  privately  or  judicially,  on  real  or  supposed 
departures  from  it;  and  to  instruct  the  inexperienced 
and  the  doubting  in  the  great  doctrines  of  our  holy  re- 
ligion. And  although  all  Elders  are  not  expected  to 
be  profound  theologians^  any  more  than  all  ministers; 
yet  that  the  former,  as  well  as  the  latter,  should  have 
a  general  and  accurate  acquaintance  with  the  gospel 
system,  and  be  ready  to  defend  its  leading  doctrines,  by 
a  ready,  pertinent,  and  conclusive  reference  to  scriptural 
testimony,  and  thus  be  able  to  "separate  between  the 
precious  and  the  vile."  in  theory  as  well  as  in  practice, 
is  surely  as  little  as  can  possibly  be  demanded  of  those 
who  are  placed  as  leaders  and  guides  in  the  house  of 
God. 

4.  Again ;  an  Elder  ought  to  be  a  man  of  eminent 
prudence.  By  prudence  here  is,  of  course,  not  meant, 
that  spurious  characteristic,  which  calls  itself  by  this 
name,  but  which  ought  rather  to  be  called  timidity,  or 
a  criminal  shrinking  from  duty,  on  the  plea  that  "there 
is  a  lion  in  the  way."  Yet,  while  we  condemn  this  as 
unworthy  of  a  Christian,  and  especially  unworthy  of  a 
Christian  Counsellor  and  Ruler;  there  is  a  prudence 
which  is  genuine,  and  greatly  to  be  coveted.  This  is 
no  other  than  practical  Christian  wisdom^  which  not 
only  discerns  what  is  right,  but  also  adopts  the  best 
mode  of  doing  it ;  which  is  not  at  all  inconsistent  with 


252  QUALIFICATIONS  FOR 

firmness,  and  the  highest  moral  courage;  but  which 
happily  regulates  and  directs  it.  It  has  been  often 
observed,  that  there  is  a  right  and  a  wrong  way  of  doing 
the  best  things.  The  thing  done,  may  be  excellent  in 
itself;  but  may  be  done  in  a  manner,  at  a  time,  and  at- 
tended with  circumstances,  which  will  be  likely  to  dis- 
gust and  repel,  and  thus  prevent  all  benefit.  Hence  a 
man  who  is  characteristically  eccentric,  undignified, 
rash,  precipitate,  or  indiscreetly  talkative,  ought  by  no 
means  to  be  selected  as  an  ecclesiastical  ruler.  He  will, 
probably,  do  more  mischief  than  good;  will  generally 
create  more  divisions  than  he  heals;  and  will  rather 
generate  offences  than  remove  them.  Perhaps  there  is 
no  situation  in  human  society  which  more  imperiously 
calls  for  delicacy,  caution,  reserve,  and  the  most  vigilant 
discretion,  than  that  of  an  ecclesiastical  Ruler.  If  popu- 
lar rumor  begin  to  charge  a  Church  member  with 
some  delinquency,  either  in  faith  or  practice :  let  one  of 
the  Elders,  under  the  notion  of  being  faithful,  implicitly 
credit  the  story,  go  about  making  inquiries  respecting 
its  truth,  winking  and  insinuating,  and  thus  contributing 
to  extend  its  circulation ;  and  however  pure  his  motives, 
he  may,  before  he  is  aware,  implicate  himself  in  the 
charge  of  slander,  and  become  so  situated  in  respect  to 
the  supposed  culprit,  as  to  render  it  altogether  improper 
that  he  should  sit  in  judgment  on  his  case.  The  maxim 
of  the  wise  man ;  "be  swift  to  hear,  slow  to  speak,  slow 
to  wrath" — applies  to  every  human  being;  especially  to 
every  professing  Christian :  but  above  all  to  every  one 
who  is  appointed  to  maintain  truth,  order,  purity,  peace 
and  love  in  the  Church  of  God. 

It  requires  much  prudence  to  judge  when  it  is  proper 
to  commence  the  exercise  of  discipline  against  a  supposed 
offender.  Discipline  is  an  important,  nay,  a  vital  matter, 


THIS  OFFICE.  253 

£n  the  Christian  Church.  But  it  may  be  commenced 
indiscreetly;  vexatiously;  when  that  which  is  alleged 
cannot  be  shown  to  be  an  offence  against  the  divine  law ; 
or  when,  though  a  really  censurable  offence,  there  is  no 
probability  that  it  can  be  proved.  To  attempt  the 
exercise  of  discipline  in  such  cases,  is  to  disgrace  it;  to 
convert  it,  from  one  of  the  most  important  means  of 
grace,  into  an  instrument  of  rashness,  petulance,  and 
childish  precipitancy.  Often,  very  often,  has  the  very 
name  of  discipline  been  rendered  odious,  the  peace  of 
families  and  neighborhoods  grievously  disturbed,  the 
influence  of  ecclesiastical  judicatories  destroyed,  and 
the  cause  of  religion  deeply  wounded,  by  judicial 
proceedings,  wThich  ought  either  never  to  have  been 
commenced,  or  to  which  the  smallest  measure  of 
prudence  would  have  given  a  very  different  direction. 
The  importance  of  the  subject  constrains  me  to 
add,  that  prudence — much  prudence  is  also  imperiously 
demanded,  in  the  exercise  of  a  dignified  and  cautious 
reserve  while  ecclesiastical  process  is  pending.  One 
great  reason  why  it  is  thought  better  by  Presbyterians, 
to  exercise  discipline  rather  by  a  bench  of  wise  and  pious 
ecclesiastical  Senators,  than  by  the  vote  of  the  whole 
body  of  Church  members,  is,  that  the  public  discus- 
sion and  decision  of  many  things  concerning  personal 
chaiacter,  which  the  exercise  of  discipline  necessarily 
discloses,  respecting  others,  as  well  as  the  culprit,  is 
adapted  in  many  cases,  to  do  more  harm  than  good, 
especially  before  the  process  is  closed.  To  guard  against 
this  evil,  it  is  very  important  that  the  Elders  carefully 
avoid  all  unseasonable  disclosures  in  respect  to  the  busi- 
ness which  may  be  at  any  time  before  the  Session. 
Until  they  have  done  what  shall  be  deemed  proper,  in  a 
delicate  case,  it  is  surely  unwise,  by  thoughtless  blabbing, 

Y 


254  QUALIFICATIONS  FOR 

to  throw  obstacles  in  their  own  way,  and  perhaps  to 
defeat  the  whole  purpose  which  they  have  in  view. 
Yet  how  often,  by  one  imprudent  violation  of  this  plain 
rule,  has  the  discipline  of  the  Church  been  degraded  or 
frustrated,  and  the  character  of  those  who  administered 
it  exposed  to  ridicule? 

These,  and  similar  considerations,  serve  clearly  to 
show,  that  no  degree  of  piety  can  supersede  the  necessity 
of  prudence  in  ecclesiastical  rulers;  and  that,  of  all 
characters  in  a  congregation,  an  indiscreet,  meddling, 
garrulous,  gossipping,  tattling  Elder,  is  one  of  the  most 
pestiferous. 

5.  It  is  important  that  an  Elder  be  "  of  good  report 
of  them  that  are  without."     The  circumstance 
of  his  being  chosen  to  the  office  by  the  members  of  the 
Church,  does,  indeed,  afford  strong  presumption  that  he 
sustains,  among  them  an  unexceptionable  character. 
But  it  is  also  of  great  importance  that  this  class  of  officers, 
as  well  as  those  who  "  labor  in  the  word  and  doctrine," 
should  stand  well  with  those  who  are  without,  as  well 
as  those  who  are  within  the  pale  of  the  Christian  com- 
munity.    The  ecclesiastical  ruler  may  often  be  called, 
in  discharging  his  official  duties,  to  converse  with  the 
worldly  and  profane,  who  have  no  particular  regard 
either  for  his  Master,  or  his  office.     Nay,  he  must  be, 
almost  every  day  that  he  lives,  the  object  of  the  scrutiny 
of  such  men.     In  this  case,  it  is  peculiarly  desirable 
that  his  personal  character  be   such  as  to  command 
universal  respect  and  confidence;  that  it  be  not  liable  to 
any  particular  suspicion  or  imputation;  but  that,  on  the 
contrary,  it  possess  such  weight  and  respectability  in 
the  community,  as  will  render  him  an  aid  and  a  blessing 
to  his  ecclesiastical  connexion.     To  this  end,  his  un- 
bending integrity  in  all  the  walks  of  life;  his  spotless 


THIS   OFFICE.  255 

probity  and  honor  in  every  pecuniary  transaction;  his 
gravity  and  dignity  in  all  the  intercourse  of  society;  his 
exemplary  government  of  his  own  family;  his  abstrac- 
tion from  all  unhallowed  conformity  to  the  world; — 
ought  to  present,  in  some  good  measure,  a  pattern  of 
Christian  consistency.  It  is  saying  little  in  favor  of  a 
Church  officer,  to  allege  that  his  reputation  is  such  that 
he  does  no  harm  to  the  ecclesiastical  body  with  which 
he  is  connected.  It  is  to  be  regretted,  if  he  do  not 
promote  its  benefit  every  day  by  his  active  services,  and 
extend  its  influence  by  the  lustre  of  his  example. 
G.  A  Ruling  Elder  ought  to  be  a  man  of  public 

SPIRIT    AND    ENLARGED    VIEWS.       He    wllO    is    Called 

by  his  official  duty  to  plan  and  labor  for  the  extension  of 
the  Redeemer's  kingdom,  surely  ought  not,  of  all  men, 
to  have  a  narrow  and  illiberal  mind;  to  be  sparing  of 
labor,  parsimonious  in  feeling  and  habit,  or  contented 
with  small  attainments.  It  is  eminently  desirable,  then, 
that  a  Ruling  Elder  be  a  man  of  expanded  heart  toward 
other  denominations,  as  far  as  is  consistent  with  entire 
fidelity  to  scriptural  truth  and  order;  that  he  aim  high 
in  spiritual  attainment  and  progress;  that  he  be  willing 
to  give  much,  to  labor  much,  and  to  make  sacrifices  for 
the  cause  of  Christ;  and  that  he  be  continually  looking 
and  praying  for  the  further  enlargement  and  prosperity 
of  Zion.  Such  a  man  will  not  be  willing  to  see  the 
Church  fall  asleep,  or  stagnate.  Such  a  man's  mind 
will  be  teeming  with  desires,  plans  and  prayers  for  the 
advancement  of  the  Saviour's  cause.  Such  a  man  will 
not  content  himself,  nor  be  satisfied  to  see  others  con- 
tenting themselves,  with  a  little  round  of  frigid  formalities, 
or  with  the  interests  of  a  single  parish: — but  the  aspira- 
tions of  his  heart,  and  the  active  efforts  of  his  life  will 
be  directed  to  the  extension  and  prosperity  of  the  Church 


256  QUALIFICATIONS  FOR 

in  all  its  borders,  and  to  the  universal  establishment  and 
triumph  of  that  gospel  which  is  "  the  power  of  God  unto 
salvation  to  every  one  that  believeth." 

The  qualification  of  which  we  speak  has  been,  in  all 
ages,  and  from  the  nature  of  the  case,  must  ever  be,  of 
inestimable  importance  in  every  Ruler  and  Guide  of  the 
Church.  But  we  may  venture  to  pronounce  that  it  never 
was  so  important  to  the  Church  that  she  should  have 
such  Rulers  as  it  is  at  the  present  day.  Now,  that  she  is 
awaking  from  her  slumber,  and  arousing  to  a  sense  of  her 
long  forgotten  obligations:  now  that  she  is,  as  we  hope, 
arising  from  the  dust,  and  "putting  on  her  beautiful  gar- 
ments," and  looking  abroad  in  the  length  and  breadth 
of  those  conquests  which  have  been  promised  her,  by  her 
Almighty  Head :  now  that  all  her  resources,  physical  and 
moral,  are  called  for,  in  every  direction,  with  an  emphasis 
and  a  solemnity  never  before  equalled: — is  it  not  mani- 
fest that  all  who,  in  such  a  stage  of  her  course,  undertake 
to  be  her  counsellors  and  guides,  ought  to  be  neither 
drones  nor  cowards;  neither  parsimonious  of  labor  and 
sacrifice,  nor  disposed  to  sit  down  contented  with  small 
acquisitions?     Ruling  Elders,  at  the  present  day,  have, 
perhaps,  an  opportunity  of  serving  the  Church  more 
extensively  and   effectually  than   ever   before.     How 
desirable  and  important,  then,  that  they  have  a  heart, 
in  some  measure,  commensurate  with  the  calls  and 
opportunities  of  the  day  in  which  their  lot  is  cast !    How 
desirable  that  they  cherish  those  enlarged  and  liberal 
views,  both  of  duty  and  of  effort,  which  become  those 
who  are  called  to  act  a  conspicuous  and  interesting  part 
in  a  cause  which  is  dear  to  all  holy  beings!     So  impor- 
tant is  this,  that  it  is  probable  we  shall  generally  find 
that,  in  liberality  of  contribution  to  the  various  objects  of 
Christian  effort,  and  in  enlargement  of  mind  to  desire 


THIS  OFFICE.  257 

and  seek  the  extension  of  the  Redeemer's  kingdom,  the 
mass  of  the  members  of  any  Church  may  commonly  be 
graduated  by  the  character  of  their  Elders.  If  the 
leaders  and  guides  of  the  Church  be  destitute  of  public 
spirit,  and  be  not  found  taking  the  lead  in  large  plans, 
labors  and  sacrifices  for  extending  the  reign  of  know- 
ledge, truth  and  righteousness;  it  will  be  strange  indeed 
if  a  more  enlarged  spirit  be  found  prevailing  among 
the  generality  of  their  fellow  members. 

7.  The  last  qualification  on  which  I  shall  dwell,  as 
important  in  the  office  before  us,  is  ardent  zeal,  and 
a  spirit  of  importunate  prayer.  Large  views, 
and  liberal  plans  and  donations,  will  not  answer  without 
this.  The  truth  is,  the  Church  of  God  has  the  most 
serious  and  unceasing  obstacles  to  encounter,  in  every 
step  of  her  progress.  As  long  as  she  is  faithful,  her 
course  is  never  smooth  or  unobstructed.  In  maintain- 
ing truth ; — in  guarding  the  claims  of  gospel  holiness; — 
and  in  sustaining  discipline — the  enmity  of  the  human 
heart  will  not  fail  to  manifest  itself,  and  to  offer  more  or 
less  resistance  to  that  which  is  good.  The  worldly  and 
profane  will  ever  be  found  in  the  ranks  of  determined 
opposition.  And  alas!  that  some  who  bear  the  name 
of  Christ,  are  not  unfrequently  found  in  the  same  ranks; 
thus  grieving  the  hearts,  and  trying  the  patience  of 
those  who  are  called  to  act  as  the  representatives  and 
leaders  of  the  Church.  To  meet  and  overcome  diffi- 
culties of  this  kind,  requires  all  the  fixedness  of  pur- 
pose, and  all  the  zeal  in  the  service  of  Christ,  which 
his  most  devoted  servants  can  bring  to  their  work. 

Besides  all  this,  there  is  much  in  the  daily  duties  of 
the  Ruling  Elder,  which  puts  to  a  very  serious  test  all 
his  devoted ness  to  the  cause  of  his  Master.  He  is  called 
to  live,  like  a  minister  of  the  gospel,  in  the  very  atmos- 

y2 


258  QUALIFICATIONS  FOR 

phere  of  prayer  and  religious  conversation.  In  the 
chamber  of  the  sick  and  dying;  in  conversing  with  the 
anxious  inquirer,  and  the  perplexed  or  desponding  be- 
liever ;  in  the  private  circle,  and  in  the  social  meeting 
for  prayer ;  abroad  and  at  home,  in  the  house  and  by 
the  way — it  must  be  "  his  meat  and  drink"  to  be  found 
ministering  to  the  best  interests  of  his  fellow  men.  So 
that  if  he  have  but  little  zeal ;  but  little  taste  for  prayer; 
but  little  anxiety  for  the  welfare  of  immortal  souls ; 
he  will  not,  he  cannot,  enter  with  proper  feeling  into 
his  appropriate  employments.  But  if  he  be  animated 
with  a  proper  spirit,  he  will  find  it  pleasant  to  be  thus 
employed.  Instead  of  shunning  scenes  and  opportuni- 
ties of  usefulness,  he  will  diligently  seek  them.  And 
instead  of  finding  them  wearisome,  he  will  feel  no  hap- 
piness more  pure  and  rich  than  that  which  he  expe- 
riences in  such  occupations  as  these. 

It  is  evident,  then,  not  only  that  the  ecclesiastical 
Ruler  ought  to  have  unfeigned  piety;  but  that  his 
piety  ought  to  be  of  that  decisive  character,  and  accom- 
panied with  that  fervent  zeal,  which  bears  its  possessor 
forward,  without  weariness  in  the  discharge  of  self-de- 
nying duties.  The  higher  the  degree  in  which  he  pos- 
sesses this  characteristic,  provided  it  be  accompanied 
with  wisdom,  prudence  and  a  knowledge  of  human 
nature,  the  greater  will  probably  be  his  usefulness  in 
the  Church  which  he  serves;  and  the  greater,  assuredly, 
will  be  his  own  personal  enjoyment  in  rendering  that 
service. 

It  is  more  than  possible  that  this  view  of  the  qualifi- 
cations proper  for  the  office  which  we  are  considering, 
may  cause  some,  when  solicited  to  undertake  it,  to  draw 
back,  under  the  conscientious  impression,  that  they  have 
not  the  characteristics  which  are  essential  to  the  faith- 


THIS  OFFICE.  259 

ful  discharge  of  its  duties.  And  it  would  be  wrong  to 
say  that  there  are  not  some  cases,  in  which  such  an 
impression  ought  to  be  admitted.  There  can  be  no 
doubt  that  there  are  those  who  bear  this  office,  who 
ought  never  to  have  accepted  it.  To  this  class,  unques- 
tionably, belong  all  those  who  have  no  taste  for  the 
appropriate  duties  of  the  office,  and  who  do  not  resolve 
sedulously  and  faithfully  to  perform  them.  But  let  no 
humble  devoted  follower  of  Jesus  Christ,  who  truly 
desires  to  serve  and  glorify  him.  and  who  is  willing, 
from  the  heart,  to  do  all  that  God  shall  enable  him,  for 
the  promotion  of  the  Redeemer's  kingdom; — let  not 
him  be  deterred,  by  the  representation  which  has  been 
given  from  accepting  the  office,  if  called  to  it  by  his 
Christian  brethren.  The  deeper  his  sense  of  his  own  un- 
fitness, the  move  likely  will  he  be  to  apply  unceasingly 
and  importunately  for  heavenly  aid;  and  the  nearer 
he  lives  to  the  throne  of  grace,  the  more  largely  will  he 
partake  of  that  wisdom  and  strength  which  he  needs. 
There  are,  no  doubt,  some,  as  was  said,  who  are  really 
unqualified  for  this  office ;  but  in  general,  it  may  be 
maintained,  that  those  who  have  the  deepest  impression 
of  the  importance  and  arduousness  of  its  duties,  and  of 
their  own  want  of  adequate  qualifications,  are  far  better 
prepared  for  those  duties,  than  such  as  advance  to  the 
discharge  of  them  with  unwavering  confidence  and 
eelf-complacency. 


CHAPTER  XII. 

ON  THE   ELECTION  OF   RULING   ELDERS. 

Under  this  general  head,  a  variety  of  questions 
occur,  the  solution  of  which  is  important. 

I.  In  the  first  place,  who  are  the  proper  Electors 
of  Ruling  Elders?  This  question  is  not  definitely  re- 
solved by  the  "Form  of  Government*'  of  the  Presby- 
terian Church  in  the  United  States.  Its  language  is  as 
follows:  "Every  congregation  shall  elect  persons  to  the 
office  of  Ruling  Elder,  and  to  the  office  of  Deacon,  or 
either  of  them,  in  the  mode  most  approved  and  in  use 
in  that  congregation.  But  in  all  cases  the  persons 
elected  must  be  male  members  in  full  communion  in 
the  Church  in  which  they  are  to  exercise  their  office." 

When  a  new  Church  is  to  be  organized,  and  when, 
of  course,  there  are  no  Elders  already  in  office,  application 
ought  to  be  made  to  the  Presbytery,  stating  the  wishes 
of  those  who  contemplate  forming  the  Church,  request- 
ing their  sanction,  and  also  the  appointment  of  one  or 
more  of  their  number  to  preside  in  the  election  and 
ordination  of  the  candidates  for  the  respective  offices  of 
Elders  and  Deacons.  The  person  or  persons  thus  ap- 
pointed by  the  Presbytery  to  act  in  the  case,  after  causing 
due  and  regular  notice  of  their  appointment  and  its 
object,  to  be  given,  ought  to  meet  with  the  members  of 
the  congregation;  to  preach  on  the  subject  which occa- 
eions  the  meeting;  to  explain  the  nature  and  importance 


RULING   ELDERS.  261 

of  the  office;  and,  having  done  this,  to  call  upon  those 
who  may  be  qualified  as  electors,  to  give  their  votes  for 
such  of  their  number  as  they  would  wish  to  have  as  their 
spiritual  rulers.  Having  done  this  openly,  in  the  face 
of  the  congregation,  the  Ordination  of  the  Elders  elect, 
may  either  take  place  on  the  spot,  befoie  the  assembly 
shall  separate;  or  may  be  postponed  to  a  future  time, 
as  may  be  judged  most  expedient.  By  this  is  meant; 
that  the  election  in  this  case,  being  made  immediately 
by'a  popular  vote  of  the  members  of  the  Church,  there 
is  no  need  of  postponing  the  ordination,  for  the  purpose 
of  propounding  the  names  of  the  persons  elected,  from 
the  pulpit,  as  is  necessary,  and  practised  in  other  cases. 
In  the  case  supposed,  the  full  concurrence  of  the  persons 
entitled  to  vote  in  the  choice  made,  has  been  already 
ascertained  by  their  suffrages. 

In  this  choice,  the  votes  may  be  given  either  viva 
voce,  or  by  ballot.  The  latter  method,  however,  is  by 
far  the  most  common,  and,  is  evidently  the  most,  proper, 
for  a  variety  of  reasons^  some  of  which  will  readily 
occur  to  every  enlightened  and  delicate  mind. 

Concerning  the  persons  who  are  properly  entitled  to 
vote  in  such  an  election,  there  has  been  some  diversity 
of  opinion.  That  all  the  male  members  of  the  Church, 
in  what  is  called  "full  communion."  have  this  right, 
there  can  be  no  question.  In  this  all  are  agreed.  But 
it  has  been  maintained,  not,  indeed,  with  the  same 
unanimity,  yet,  it  is  believed,  by  a  large  majority  of  the 
most  judicious  and  enlightened  judges,  and  probably  on 
the  most  correct  principles,  that  all  baptized  members 
of  the  Church,  who  must  be,  of  course,  regarded  as 
subject  to  the  government  and  discipline  administered 
by  these  Rulers,  are  entitled  to  a  voice  in  their  election. 
And  where  there  are  female  heads  of  families,  who 


262 


ELECTION  OF 


bear  the  relation  of  membership  to  the  Church,  in  either 
of  the  senses  just  mentioned,  and  who  are  not  represented 
by  some  qualified  male  relative,  on  the  occasion,  it  has 
been  judged  proper  to  allow  them  to  vote  in  the  choice 
of  Ruling  Elders,  as  is  generally  the  case  in  the  choice 
of  a  Pastor. 

There  seems,  however,  to  be  some  good  reason  for 
restricting  the  right  to  vote  for  Ruling  Elders  within 
narrower  bounds,  than  are  commonly  assigned  in  the 
choice  of  a  Pastor.  In  that  choice,  in  most  congrega- 
tions, all  pew-holders,  and  all  stated  worshippers 
who  are  stated  contributors  to  the  support  of  the  Pastor, 
in  their  just  proportion,  whether  baptized  or  not,  whether 
willing  to  submit  to  the  exercise  of  discipline  or  not,  and 
whether  of  fair  moral  character  or  not,  are  considered 
as  entitled  to  a  vote.  But,  in  the  election  of  a  Pastor, 
there  is  one  security  against  an  improper  choice,  which 
does  not  exist  in  the  case  of  a  Ruling  Elder;  namely, 
that  the  call  must  be  submitted  to  the  Presbytery,  and 
receive  the  sanction  of  that  body  before  it  can  be  prose- 
cuted. \J  liereas  no  such  security  exists  in  the  case  of 
a  Ruling  Elder.  Of  course,  if  all  pew-holders,  and 
pecuniary  supporters,  without  any  reference  to  member- 
ship or  character,  were  allowed  to  vote  in  the  election  of 
the  latter  class  of  officers,  they  might  choose  persons  to 
the  last  degree  unsuitable  for  the  office,  and  adapted  to 
destroy  rather  than  benefit  the  Church.  Besides; 
every  one,  however,  heterodox  or  immoral,  may  be  a 
stated  attendant  on  public  worship: — and  every  stated 
attendant  on  the  worship  of  any  Church,  may  be  said 
to  have  an  interest  in  the  character  of  the  Pastor,  and 
a  right,  as  far  as  may  be,  to  be  pleased  in  the  choice. 
But  no  one  can  be  said  to  have  any  part,  or  particular 
interest  in  the  discipline  of  the  Church,  excepting  those 


RTLING  ELDERS.  263 

who  are  subject  to  its  operation  ;  which  can  be  the  case 
with  none  but  those  who  are  members  of  the  Church. 
Accordingly,  the  General  Assembly  of  the  Church 
which  met  in  1829,  in  answer  to  a  question  solemnly 
referred  to  it  by  one  of  the  Western  Presbyteries,* — 
adopfed,  and  sent  to  the  Churches  the  following  judg- 
ment in  relation  to  the  subject  before  us.     "It  is  the 
opinion  of  this  General  Assembly,   that  the  office  of 
Ruling  Elder  is  an  office  in  the  Church  of  Christ;  that 
Ruling  Elders,  as  such,  according  to  our  Confession  of 
Faith,  Book  i.,  on  Government,  Chapter  v.,  are  the  re- 
presentatives of  the  people,  by  whom  they  are  chosen, 
for  the  purpose  of  exercising  government  and  discipline 
in  the  kingdom  of  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ;  that  the  dis- 
cipline lawfully   exercised   by    them,  is  the  discipline 
exercised  through  them  by  trfeir  constituents,  in  whose 
name,  and  by  whose  authority  they  act  in  all  that  they 
do.t     To  suppose,  therefore,  that  an  unbaptized  person, 
not  belonging  to  the  visible  kingdom  of  the  Redeemer? 
might  vote  at  the  election  of  Ruling  Elders,  would  be 
to  establish  the  principle,  that  the  children  of  this  world 
might,  through  their  representatives,  exercise  discipline 
in  the  Church  of  God ;  which  is  manifestly  unscriptural 

*  The  question  submitted  was  in  these  words — "  Ought  an 
unbaptized  person,  who  yet  pays  his  proportion  for  the  support 
of  a  congregation,  to  be  permitted  to  vote  for  Ruling  Elders?" 

f  It  is  well  known  that  the  General  Assembly,  in  thit  clause 
of  their  judgment,  did  not  mean  to  deny  that  Ruling  Elders,  in 
the  rightful  discharge  of  their  duties,  act  in  the  name  and  by 
the  authority  of  Christ.  This  great  truth  is  plainly  recognized 
in  a  preceding  clause.  But  merely  to  say,  that  they  act  as 
the  representatives,  and  on  the  behalf  of  the  members  of  tha 
Church  at  large;  so  that  when  a  complaint  is  brought  to  the 
Eldership,  it  is,  strictly  speaking-,  according  to  ancient  language, 
M  telling  it  to  the  Church." 


264  ELECTION  OF 

and  contrary  to  the  standards  of  our  Church.  Resolved, 
therefore,  that  the  question  in  the  said  overture  be  an- 
swered in  the  negative." 

Where  there  is  already  an  existing  Church  Session, 
and  the  object  is  to  add  to  the  number  of  its  members, 
in  this  case  the  election  of  new  Elders  may  be  ntede  in 
any  one  of  several  methods: — either  by  the  vote  of  the 
members  of  ihe  Church  at  large,  as  already  stated;  or 
by  a  nomination  on  the  part  of  the  existing  Elders, 
proposed  to  the  Church,  and  considered  as  their  choice, 
if  not  objected  to;  or  by  the  nomination  of  double  the 
number  proposed  to  be  chosen,  by  the  Session,  and  a 
choice  by  the  members  of  the  Church  out  of  the  list  so 
nominated. 

In  the  Church  of  Scotland  "new  Elders  are  chosen 
by  the  voice  of  the  Session.*  After  their  election  has 
been  agreed  upon,  their  names  are  read  from  the  pulpit, 
in  a  paper  called  an  Edict,  appointing  a  day,  at  the 
distance  of  not  less  than  ten  days,  for  their  ordination. 
H  no  member  of  the  congregation  offer  any  objection 
upon  that  day;  or  if  the  Session  find  the  objections 
that  are  offered  frivolous,  or  unsupported  by  evidence, 
the  minister  proceeds  in  the  face  of  the  congregation, 
to  ordain  the  new  Elders."t 

*  In  the  infancy  of  the  Reformed  Church  in  Scotland,  the 
mode  of  electing  Ruling1  Elders  was  by  no  means  uniform.  In 
some  Churches,  the  existing  Session  made  a  nomination  to  the 
Church  members,  out  of  which  a  choice  was  made  by  the  latter. 
In  other  Churches,  the  choice  was  made  immediately  by  the 
communicants  at  large.  In  some  Churches,  the  Session  ap- 
pointed electors;  and  in  others,  they  acted  as  electors  them- 
selves. It  was  a  number  of  years  before  the  practice  stated 
above  as  the  prevalent  one,  bocome  general.  M'Crie'b 
Life  of  Melville,  ii.  477,  478. 

t  Hill's  Institutes.     Part  ii.  Section  4th,  212,  213. 


RULING   ELDERS.  265 

The  same  method  of  adding  new  Elders  to  existing 
Church  Sessions,  is  adopted,  in  substance,  by  many 
Presbyterian  Churches  in  the  United  States.  The 
Church  Sessions,  in  these  congregations,  judge  when  it 
is  proper  to  make  an  addition  to  the  number  of  Elders'* 
deliberate  on  the  proper  candidates;  ascertain  privately 
whether  they  will  serve  if  appointed ;  and  after  com, 
pleting,  with  due  consideration  and  care,  their  lists, 
cause  them  to  be  announced  by  their  moderator,  from 
the  pulpit,  on  several  successive  sabbaths; — after  which 
at  the  proper  time,  their  ordination  takes  place.  This 
plan  of  choosing  has  some  real  advantages.  When 
wisely  executed,  it  may  be  supposed  likely  to  lead  to  a 
more  calm,  judicious  and  happy  choice,  than  would 
probably  result  from  a  popular  vote,  especially  where 
no  consultation  and  understanding  had  taken  place 
among  the  more  grave,  pious  and  prudent  of  the  Church 
members.  And,  therefore,  where  this  plan  has  been 
long  in  use,  and  unanimously  acquiesced  in,  it  had, 
perhaps,  better  not  be  changed.  Yet  it  seems  to  be 
more  in  harmony  with  the  general  spirit  of  Presbyterian 
Church  government,  and  certainly  with  the  prevailing 
character  of  our  institutions,  to  refer  the  choice,  where  it 
ean  conveniently  be  done,  after  due  consultation  and 
care,  to  the  suffrages  of  the  members  of  the  Church. 

Accordingly,  the  General  Assembly  of  our  Church, 

*  It  is  hardly  necessary  to  say,  that  when  the  Church 
Session,  in  any  such  congregation  shall  be  considered  as 
unduly  delaying  to  make  a  suitable  addition  of  new  Elders  to 
their  number,  it  is  the  privilege  of  the  members  of  the  Church, 
after  due  application  and  remonstrance  to  the  Session,  without 
effect,  to  apply  to  the  Presbytery  for  the  redress  of  their 
alleged  grievance. 

z 


266  ELECTION   OF 

which  convened  in  1827,  in  reply  to  a  complaint  made? 
respecting  the  mode  of  electing  Elders  adopted  in  one 
of  the  Churches  under  the  care  of  the  Presbytery  of 
Philadelphia,  pronounced  the  following  judgment. 

"While  the  assembly  would  recognize  the  undoubted 
right  of  each  congregation  to  elect  their  Elders  in  the 
mode  most  approved  and  in  use  among  them,  they 
would  recommend  that,  in  all  cases  where  any  dissatis- 
faction appears  to  exist,  the  congregation  be  promptly 
convened,  to  decide  on  their  future  mode  of  election. 
And  they  are  inclined  to  believe  that  the  spirit  of  our 
constitution  would  be  most  fully  sustained  by  having, 
in  all  cases,  a  direct  vote  of  the  congregation  in  the 
appointment  of  their  Elders." 

In  the  Church  of  Holland,  the  following  is  the 
general  rule  in  regard  to  the  election  of  this  class  of 
officers: — "The  Elders  shall  be  chosen  by  the  suffrages 
of  the  Consistory,  and  of  the  Deacons.  In  making 
this  choice,  it  shall  be  lawful,  as  shall  best  suit  the 
situation  of  each  CJiurch,  either  to  nominate  as  many 
Elders  as  shall  be  judged  necessary  for  the  approbation 
of  the  members  in  full  communion,  and  upon  their 
being  approved,  and  found  acceptable,  to  confirm  them 
with  public  prayers  and  engagements;  or,  to  propose  a 
double  number,  that  the  one  half  of  those  nominated 
may  be  chosen  by  the  members,  and  in  the  same 
manner  confirmed  in  their  office."  Accordingly,  in  that 
country,  although  an  election  by  the  members  of  the 
Church  sometimes  takes  place;  yet  the  common  method? 
it  it  believed,  is  for  the  Consistory,  or  Eldership  of  the 
Church,  together  with  the  Deacons,  to  make  choice  of 
new  Elders  and  Deacons,  in  other  words,  to  form  a  list 
of  proper  candidates  for  the  office,  to  nominate  them, 


RULING  ELDERS.  267 

agreeably  to  a  certain  rule,  to  the  Church,  and  if  no 
objection  be  made,  to  consider  the  person  so  nominated 
as  the  choice  of  the  Church. 

In  the  ';  Explanatory  Articles"  of  government  adopted 
by  the  Reformed  Dutch  Church  in  the  United  States, 
the  following  article  explains  the  practice  of  that  Church 
in  this  country.  "  The  manner  of  choosing  Elders  and 
Deacons  is  not  rigidly  defined.  A  double  number  may 
be  nominated  by  the  Consistory,  out  of  which  the 
members  of  the  Church  may  choose  those  who  shall 
serve.  Or,  all  the  members  of  the  Church  may  unite 
in  nominating  and  choosing  the  whole  number,  without 
the  interference  of  the  Consistory.  Or,  the  Consistory, 
for  the  time  being,  as  representing  all  the  members,  may 
choose  the  whole,  and  refer  the  persons  thus  chosen,  by 
publishing  them  in  the  Church,  for  the  approbation  of 
the  people.  The  last  method  has  been  found  most 
convenient,  especially  in  large  Churches,  and  has  long 
been  generally  adopted.  But  where  that,  or  either  of 
the  other  modes,  has  for  many  yearsA>een  followed  in  any 
Church,  there  shall  be  no  variation  or  change,  but  by 
previous  application  to  the  Classis,  and  express  leave 
first  obtained  for  altering  such  custom."* 

In  the  Church  of  Geneva,  the  choice  of  Elders  and 
Deacons  is  made  in  the  manner  which  the  foregoing 
article  declares  to  be  most  common  in  the  Dutch 
Churches  in  the  United  States, — namely,  by  a  selection 
and  nomination  by  the  consistorial  assembly,  which, 
if  not  opposed,  is  final,  and  followed  by  the  usual 
ordination,  without  the  "laying  on  of  hands."t 

The   same   method,    also,  of  electing   Elders   and 

*  See  the  Constitution  of  the  Reformed  Dutch  Church  in  the 
United  States. 
f  See  Merciee's  Church  History  of  Geneva,  p.  209. 


268  ELECTION  OF 

Deacons  was  early  established  in  the  Protestant  Churches 
of  France.  The  Consistory  nominated,  and  the  nomi- 
nation was  announced  from  the  pulpit,  for  the  approba- 
tion of  the  people.* 

II.  The  next  question  which  arises,  is  how  often 
ought  this  election  to  be  made?  Is  it  for  life,  or  for 
a  limited  time? 

According  to  the  original  constitution  of  the  Reformed 
Church  of  Scotland,  the  Elders  and  Deacons  were 
chosen  but  for  one  year.  This  was  the  arrangement 
adopted  in  the  "First  Book  of  Discipline,"  formed  inl560, 
and  also  in  the  "Second  Book  of  Discipline,"  drawn  up- 
inl578,  and  which  continued  for  a  number  of  years  in 
the  Scottish  Church.  This  plan  seems  to  have  l^een 
suggested  by  the  earnest  wish  of  the  first  Elders  them- 
selves, who,  finding  the  office  burdensome,  as  it  then 
involved  much  care  and  labor,  begged  permission  to 
resign  it  to  others  after  a  single  year.  But  although  the 
election,  at  that  time,  was  made  annually,  and  a  large 
portion  of  the  incumbents  of  the  office  were  actually 
changed  every  year;  3ret  the  same  men  might  be  elected 
from  year  to  year,  if  they  were  willing  to  serve,  and  it 
sometimes  happened,  in  fact,  that  a  few,  whose  piety, 
and  leisure  rendered  due  attention  to  the  duties  of  the 
office  easy  and  pleasant,  were  re-elected  for  many  suc- 
cessive years.  The  same  form  of  ordination  seems  to 
have  been  repeated  after  every  annual  election,  as  well 
with  respect  to  those  who  had  often  been  ordained  before. 
as  to  those  who  had  never  submitted  to  this  solemnity. 

This  practice,  however,  has  been  long  since  laid 
aside  in  the  Church  of  Scotland;  and  the  office  of  the 
Ruling  Elder  been,  for  many  years,  regarded  as  an 


*  Q.uick's  Synodicon,  i,  27? 


RULING  ELDERS.  269 

office  for  life,  as  much  as  that  of  the  ministry  of  the 
Gospel. 

In  the  Protestant  Churches  of  France  also,  the  office 
in  question  was,  from  the  beginning,  and  it  is  believed 
still  is,  temporary.  The  rule  on  this  subject,  found  in 
the  Book  of  "Discipline  of  the  Reformed  Churches  of 
France,"  as  drawn  up  by  the  first  National  Synod,  in 
1559,  is  in  these  remarkable  words: — "The  office  of 
Elders  and  Deacons,  as  it  is  now  in  use  among  us,  is 
not  perpetual ;  yet  because  changes  are  not  commodious, 
they  shall  be  exhorted  to  continue  m  their  offices  as  long 
as  they  can ;  and  they  shall  not  lay  them  down  without 
having*  first  obtained  leave  from  their  Churches."* 

The  Reformed  Dutch  Church  in  the  United  States, 
after  the  example  of  her  parent  Church  in  Europe, 
adopts  the  following  plan  for  the  election  of  Elders  and 
Deacons : — "In  order  to  lessen  the  burden  of  a  perpetual 
attendance  upon  ecclesiastical  duties,  and  by  a  rotation 
in  office  to  bring  forward  deserving  members,  it  is  the 
established  custom  in  the  Reformed  Dutch  Church, 
that  Elders  and  Deacons  remain  only  two  years  in 
service,  after  which  they  retire  from  their  respective 
offices,  and  others  are  chosen  in  their  places;  the  rotation 
being  always  conducted  in  such  a  manner,  that  only 
one  half  of  the  whole  number  retire  each  year.  (See 
Syn.  Dord.  Art.  27„)  But  this  does  not  forbid  the  liberty 
ef  immediately  choosing  the  same  persons  again,  if 
from  any  circumstances  it  may  be  judged  expedient  to 
continue  them  in  office  by  a  re-election. "t 

Yet,  notwithstanding  this  annual  election,  those  who 
have  ever  borne  the  office  of  Elder  or  Deacon  in  the 


♦  Quick's  Synod  icon,  p.  28. 

■j.  Constitution  of  the  Reformed  Dutch  Church  in  the  U.  State$. 

z2 


270  ELECTION  OF- 

Dutch  Church,  are  still  considered,  though  never  re-. 
elected,  as  bearing,  while  they  live,  a  certain  relation  to, 
the  offices  which  they  have  sustained  respectively.  This 
appears  from  the  following  additional  article,  found  in 
the  same  code.  "  When- matters  of  peculiar  importance 
occur,  particularly  in  calling  a  Minister,  building  of 
Churches,  or  whatever  relates  immediately  to  the  peace 
and  welfare  of  the  whole  congregation,  it  is  usual  (and 
it  is  strongly  recommended,  upon  such  occasions, 
always)  for  the  Consistory  to  call  together  all  those  who 
have  ever  served  as  Elders  or  Deacons,  that  by  their 
advice  and  counsel  they  may  assist  the  members  of  the 
Consistory.  These,  when  assembled,  constitute  what 
is  called  the  u  Great  Consistory."  From  the  object  or 
design  of  their  assembling,  the  respective  powers  of  each 
are  easily  ascrtained.  Those  who  are  out  of  office, 
have  only  an  advisory  or  counselling  voice;  and,  as 
they  are  not  actual  members  of  the  board  or  corporation, 
cannot,  have  a  decisive  vote.  After  obtaining  their  ad 
vice,  it  rests  with  the  members  of  the  Consistory  to 
follow  the  counsel  given  them,  or  not,  as  they  shall 
judge  proper." 

But  in  the  Presbyterian  Church  in  the  United 
►States,  the  office  of  Ruling  Elder  is  now,  and  has  been 
from  the  beginning,  perpetual.  The  election  to  it,  is 
once  for  all.  It,  of  course,  continues  through  life,  un- 
less the  individual  be  deposed  from  office.  Like  a 
minister  of  the  gospel,  he  cannot  lay  aside  his  office  at 
pleasure.*     He  may,  indeed,  from  ill  health,  or  for 

*  The  writer  is  here  stating-  what  is  the  actual  constitution, 
of  the  Presbyterian  Church  as  to  this  point.     He  does  not  sup- 
pose, however,  that  there  is  any  infringement  of  Presbyterian 
principle  in  the  annual  elections  of  Ruling  Elders,  formerly 
.  practised  in  the  Church  of  Scotland,  and  still  practised  in  the 


RULING  ELDERS.  271 

other  reasons,  cease,  if  he  think  proper,  to  perform  the 
active  duties  of  the  office.  But  he  is  still  an  Elder ; 
and  if  he  recover  his  health,  or  the  reason  which  in- 
duced him  to  withdraw,  be  removed,  he  may  resume 
the  duties  of  the  office  without  a  new  ordination. — Of 
this,  however,  more  in  a  subsequent  chapter. 

III.  A  third  question  which  arises  under  this  head, 
is — How  many  Elders  ought  to  be  elected  in  each 
Church?  In  answer  to  this  question  little  more  than 
considerations  of  expediency  can  be  suggested.  No 
absolute  rule  can  be  laid  down. 

In  the  Jewish  Synagogue,  we  are  told,  there  were 
commonly  at  least  three  Ruling  Elders  found  in  each 
ecclesiastical  Senate.  In  the  time  of  Cyprian,  in  the 
third  century,  there  were,  in  the  single  Church  of  Car- 
thage, of  which  he  was  Bishop,  or  Pastor,  eight  El- 
ders, of  whom  five  were  opposed  to  his  being  received 
as  their  Pastor.  Soon  after  the  opening  of  the  Re- 
formation in  Scotland,  and  while  there  was  only  a 
single  Protestant  congregation  in  the  city  of  Edin- 
burgh, there  were  twleve  Elders,  and  sixteen  Deacons^ 
belonging  to  that  Church.  Dunlop,  ii.,  638.  In  the 
year   1560,  four  years  before  the  decease  of  Calvin. 


Dutch  and  French  Churches.  Where  a  Church  is  large,  con- 
taining a  sufficient  number  of  grave,  pious  and  prudent  mem- 
bers, to  furnish  an  advantageous  rotation,  and  where  the  duties 
of  the  office  are  many  and  arduous,  it  may  not  be  without  its 
advantages  to  keep  up  some  change  of  incumbency  in  this 
office.  But,  in  general,  it  seems  manifest,  that  the  spiritual 
interests  of  a  congregation  will  be  likely  to  be  managed  most 
steadily  and  to  edification  by  permanent  officers,  who  are  never 
even  temporarily  withdrawn  from  the  sphere  of  duty  in  which 
they  move,  and  who  are  daily  gaining  more  knowledge  of  the 
Church,  and  more  experience. 


272  ELECTION  OF 

there  were  twelve  Ruling  Elders  in  the  Church  of  Ge- 
neva.    Calv.  Epist.  Gaspari  Oleviano. 

The  Form  of  Government  of  the  Presbyterian  Church 
in  the  United  States,  does  not  define  the  proper  num- 
ber of  Elders  in  each  Church.  Speaking  of  the  Church 
Session,  it  declares  (Chapter  9,  Sect.  2.,)  that  of  this 
Judicatory,  utwo  Elders,  if  there  be  a3  many  in  the 
congregation,  with  the  Pastor,  shall  be  necessary  to 
constitute  a  quorum."  From  this  rule,  it  seems  to  be  a 
legitimate  inference,  that  if  there  be  only  one  Elder  in 
the  congregation,  he  with  the  Pastor,  may  constitute  a 
regular  Session,  for  the  transaction  of  business.  The 
existence  of  so  small  a  number  as  even  hvo,  however, 
is  greatly  to  be  regretted,  and  ought  by  no  means  to  be 
submitted  to,  if  proper  candidates  for  the  office  can  be 
found.  In  the  smallest  Church  it  is  desirable  that  there 
should  be  at  least  from  five  to  seven  Elders.  Without 
some  such  number.,  there  cannot  be  that  weight  in  their 
judicial  counsels,  and  that  influence  drawn  from  every 
part  of  the  congregation  in  aid  of  the  Pastor,  and  the 
best  interests  of  the  whole  body,  which  a  well  selected 
bench  of  officers  of  that  number,  would  be  likely  to  im- 
part. In  large  Churches,  there  ought  to  be  at  least  ten  or. 
ticelve:  and  in  Churches  much  beyond  the  usual  size, 
fourteen  ox  fifteen  would  not  be  more  than  enough  to 
gain  all  the  advantages  which  the  best  arrangement 
with  regard  to  this  office  might  be  expected  to  secure. 

It  ought  to  be  borne  in  mind,  however,  that  there  is 
no  advantage  whatever  to  be  gained  by  electing  un- 
suitable men  to  this  office,  for  the  sake  of  adding  mere 
numbers  to  the  Church  Session.  It  is  much  better  to 
get  along  with  three  or  four  pious,  wise  and  prudent 
Elders,  than  to  add  two  or  three  dozens  to  their  ranks 
of  men  of  an  opposite  stamp,  who,  by  their  want  of 


RULING  ELDERS.  273 

piety  and  wisdom,  might  be  a  nuisance  instead  of  a 
comfort; — a  curse  instead  of  a  blessing.  Pastors,  then, 
and  their  Churches,  instead  of  making  haste  to  fill  up 
the  ranks  of  their  congregational  Senators  with  un- 
suitable members,  had  better  wait  patiently  until  the 
Head  of  the  Church  shall  provide  for  them  candidates 
in  some  measure  "after  his  own  heart." 

IV.  The  last  question  which  wrili  be  proposed  for 
solution  is,  who  may  be  considered  as  eligible  to 
this  OFFICE? 

The  proper  personal  qualifications  for  this  office  ha\  < 
been  considered  in  a  preceding  chapter.     These  are 
not  intended  to  be  brought  into  view  here.     All  that  i> 
designed  is,  a  reference  to  two  or  three  points  of  legal 
qualification,  which  are  necessary  to  render  a  candi 
date  eligible  in  the  view  of  the  ecclesiastical  casuist. 

And  first,  no  one  can  be  elected  an  Elder  in  any 
Church,  who  is  not  a  member  in  full  communion  in 
the  Church  of  which  he  is  to  be  chosen  an  officer.  The 
extreme  impropriety  of  choosing  men  to  represent  the 
members  of  the  Church,  and  to  sit  in  judgment  on  the 
standing,  deportment  and  Church  membership  of  others 
who  were  not  themselves  in  full  communion  with  the 
body  of  Christ,  is  so  glaring  as  to  need  no  comment. 

But  the  eligible  candidate  for  this  choice  must  be  a 
male  member.  Some,  indeed,  have  seriously  doubted 
whether  there  were  tool,  in  the  apostolic  Church,  female 
Elders,  or  Elder e sses ;  and  also  whether  there  ought 
not  to  be  a  similar  class  of  Elders  in  every  Church  at 
the  present  day.  A  great  majority,  however,  who  have 
treated  of  this  subject,  believe,  that  the  female  officers 
apparently  referred  to  in  Titus  ii.  3,  and  a  few  other 
passages  in  the  New  Testament,  were  intended  to  be 
merely  a  temporary  appointment,  arising  out  of  that 


274  ELECTION  OF 

state  of  seclusion  in  which  females  lived,  and  do  still 
live,  in  the  Eastern  world,  and  not  at  all  necessary  in 
those  countries  where  females  may  be  approached  and 
instructed  without  the  intervention  of  individuals  of 
their  own  sex.  The  Presbyterian  Church  has  judged 
and  acted  in  conformity  with  this  view  of  the  subject.* 
It  has  been  queried,  whether  a  person  who  is  an 
acting  Ruling  Elder  in  one  Church,  may  be  chosen  to 
the  same  office  in  another,  and  thus  be  an  acting  mem- 
ber of  two  Church  Sessions  at  the  same  time?  This 
question  ought,  undoubtedly,  to  be  answered  in  the 
negative.  An  Elder  can  no  more  be  a  member  of  two 
different  Sessions,  and  responsible,  of  course,  to  both,  at 
the  same  time,  than  a  private  Christian  can  be  enrolled 
as  a  member  in  two  different  Churches  at  the  same 
time,  and  equally  amenable  to  both;  or  than  a  minis- 
ter of  the  Gospel  can  be  a  member  of  two  Presbyteries, 
at  the  same  time,  and  liable  to  be  called  to  an  account 
by  both,  simultaneously,  and  to  have  entirely  inconsis- 
tent requisitions  made  by  each.  An  Elder  in  one 
Church,  then,  is  not  eligible  to  the  Eldership  in  another, 
unless  on  the  principle  of  his  taking  a  dismission  from 
the  former,  for  the  purpose  of  forming  a  regular  and 
official  relation  to  the  latter. 

*  The  Moravians,  or  United  Brethren^  and  the  society  of 
Friends,  or  Quakers,  are  the  only  ecclesiastical  bodies  in  Pro- 
testant Christendom,  so  far  as  is  now  recollected,  in  whose 
system  of  Church  order  Female  Elders  actually  have  a  place. 


OP  THE  ORDINATION  OP  RULING  ELDERS. 

By  Ordination  is  meant  that  solemn  rite,  or  act,  by 
which  a  candidate  for  any  office  in  the  Church  of  Christ, 
is  authoritatively  designated  to  that  office,  by  those  who 
are  clothed  with  power  for  the  purpose. 

It  cannot  require  formal  argument  to  prove,  that  this 
rite,  or  something  analagous  and  equivalent  to  it,  is  in- 
dispensable in  conducting  all  regular  ecclesiastical  go- 
vernment. If  certain  officers  have  been  appointed  in 
the  Church  by  Jesus  Christ,  her  King  and  Head; — if 
certain  qualifications  have  been  declared  by  Him  in- 
dispensable to  fit  men  for  serving  the  Church  in  these 
offices,  without  which  they  ought  not  to  be  permitted 
to  occupy  them ; — and  if  an  extraordinary  and  immedi- 
ate designation  to  office  by  Jesus  Christ  himself,  be  not 
now  to  be  expected  in  any  case; — if  these  things  be  so, 
it  inevitably  follows,  that  some  person  or  persons  must 
have  power  committed  to  them  by  the  Head  of  the 
Church,  to  examine  or  try  candidates  for  these  offices; 
to  judge  of  their  qualifications ;  and,  if  approved,  to 
invest  them  with  office.  The  idea  that,  with  such 
directions  as  the  New  Testament  contains  on  this 
subject,  men  should  be  left  at  liberty  to  take  these  offices 
upon  themselves,  by  their  own  act,  and  at  their  own 
pleasure — is  full  of  absurdity;  and,  if  realized,  would 


276  ORDINATION  OF 

undoubtedly  lead  to  endless  disorder  and  mischief.  Only 
suppose  the  secular  offices  of  a  nation  to  be  thus  assumed 
by  men  at  will ;  and  by  none  more  readily  than  the 
vain,  the  ignorant,  the  self-sufficient,  and  the  ambi- 
tious;— as  would  inevitably  be  the  case,  if  such  were 
the  path  of  access  to  office: — and  there  would  be  an 
end  of  all  order.  But  if  it  he  neither  safe  nor  permitted 
for  men  to  intrude  into  official  stations  uncalled;  and  if 
an  immediate  investiture  by  the  Master  himself  be.  out 
of  the  question;  we  are  driven  to  the  conclusion,  that 
all  regular  and  lawful  introduction  to  office,  must  be 
through  the  medium  of  human  ordainers,  acting  in 
the  name  of  Christ,  and  governing  themselves  by  his 
declared  will. 

Accordingly,  while  the  Saviour  himself,  in  the  days 
of  his  flesh,  immediately  invested  with  office  the  twelve 
Apostles,  and  all  others  whom  he  personally  called  and 
sent  forth;  no  sooner  had  He  ascended  to  heaven,  than 
the  practice  of  introducing  to  office  by  the  instrumen- 
tality of  men,  began,  and,  so  far  as  we  are  informed, 
was  uniformly  continued.  Then  the  ministers  of 
Christ  began  to  act  upon  the  principle  afterwards  so 
explicitly  communicated  to  Timothy,  and  enjoined 
upon  him: — "That  which  thou  hast  heard  of  me, 
among  many  witnesses,  the  same  commit  thou  to 
faithful  men,  who  shall  be  able  to  teach  others  also." 
Here  we  are  plainly  taught  that  men  are  not  to  seize 
upon  the  sacred  office  themselves.  It  is  to  be  "com- 
mitted to  them;7'  and  that  not  by  every  one;  but  by 
those  only  who  have  regularly  "received"  it  them- 
selves. We  find,  too,  that  the  method  of  ordination 
which  had  been  in  use  in  the  Jewish  Synagogue,  and 
to  which  all  the  first  Christians  had  been  accustomed, 
was  transferred  to  the  Church,  and  became  a  stated  part 


RULING  ELDERS. 


277 


"trf  ecclesiastical  order.  Paul  and  Barnabas  were  set 
apart  to  a  particular  service,  by  a  plurality  of  ecclesiasti- 
cal men,  with  prayer,  imposition  of  hands,  and  fasting- 
When  they,  in  their  turn,  went  forth  to  execute  the 
work  to  which  they  had  been  called,  we  find  them, 
wherever  they  went,  "ordaining  Elders,"  and  com- 
mitting to  them  the  care  of  the  Church.  Timothy  was 
invested  with  office  "by  the  laying  on  of  the  hands  of 
the  Presbytery."  And  even  the  Deacons,  were  called 
to  their  office  in  the  same  manner.  It  was  referred  to 
the  people  to  "  look  out"  and  elect  the  candidates ;  but 
having  done  so,  they  brought  them  to  the  Apostles,  who 
"laid  their  hands  upon  them,"  and  conferred  on  them 
the  important  office  to  which  they  were  appointed. 

It  is  no  part  of  the  belief  of  Presbyterians,  that  Ordi- 
nation imparts  any  direct  influence,  either  physical  or 
moral,  to  him  who  receives  it.     They  have  no  idea  that, 
in  this  act,  by  a  kind  of  optis  operatum,  according  to 
the  Romanists,  an    "indelible  character"    is  commu- 
nicated.      They  do  not  suppose  that  any  hallowed 
energy  proceeds  from  the  hands  of  the  ordainers  to 
him  on  whose  head  they  lay  them,  in  the  act  of  impo- 
sition. But  they  regard  it  simply  as  that  official  act,  by 
which  a  man  is  pronounced,  declared  and  manifested, 
to  be  actually  put  in  possession  of  the  office  to  which  he 
has  been  chosen.     It  is,  in  one  word,  the  actual  induc- 
tion into  office  of  one  elected  to  fill  it.     The  case  is 
precisely  analogous  to  that  of  civil  rulers.     The  man 
who  is  appointed  to  the  office  of  Judge  on  a  secular 
bench,  has  no  real  addition  made,  either  to  his  intellect, 
his  learning,   or  his  moral  excellence,  by  taking  the 
oath  of  office,  and  complying  with  those  formalities 
which  actually  introduce  him  to  his  official    station. 

And  yet,  so  important  are  these  formalities,  that  his 

2  a 


278  ORDINATION  OF 

power  lawfully  to  act  as  Judge  absolutely  depends  upos 
them.  Before  they  take  place,  he  is  not  really  in 
office;  and  after  they  take  place,  he  is  clothed  with 
that  plenary  power,  which  qualifies  him  for  the  regu- 
lar discharge  of  every  official  duty.  And  so  of  every 
other  civil  officer  in  the  land.  Thus  it  is  in  the  Church. 
Ordination  is  the  essence  of  a  lawful  external  call  to 
ecclesiastical  office.  It  is  that  act,  before  which,  the 
ecclesiastical  officer  is  not  prepared,  regularly,  to  dis- 
charge a  single  function  appropriated  to  the  station  to 
which  he  is  elected;  but  after  which,  he  is  prepared  for 
their  regular  and  valid  performance. 

That  Ruling  Elders,  besides  being  regularly  chosen 
to  office,  should  be  ordained; — that  is,  publicly  and 
solemnly  designated  and  introduced  to  office  by  appropri- 
ate formalities — our  ecclesiastical  Constitution  requires, 
and  prescribes   a  Form  for  the  purpose,    concerning 
which  I  shall  only  sayr  thatr  as  far  as  it  goes,  it  is  well 
devised,  impressive  and  excellent.     I  say,  as  far  as  it 
goes; — for  it  has  been,  for  many  years,  my  settled 
conviction,  that  the  Ordination  Service  in  question,  in 
not  making  the  i?nposition  of  hands  a  stated  consti- 
tuent part  of  it,  is  chargeable  with  an  omission,  which> 
though  not  essential,  and,  therefore,  not  a  matter  for 
which  it  is  proper  to  interrupt  the  peace  of  the  Church; 
yet  appears  to  me  incapable  of  a  satisfactory  defence; 
and  which  it  is  my  earnest  hope  may  not  much  longer 
continue  to  be,  as  I  know  it  is  with  many,  matter  of 
serious  lamentation. 

The  "imposition  of  hands,"  as  a  constituent  part  of 
Ordination,  is  an  old  and  impressive  rite.  It  was,  noto- 
riously, a  familiar  mode  of  designation  to  office,  through 
the  whole  of  the  Old  Testament  economy.  It  is,  if  I 
mistake  not,  universally  acknowledged  to  have  been 


RULING  ELDER8.  279 

employed  in  ordaining  all  the  Elders  of  the  Jewish 
Synagogue.  We  find  it  is  used  in  every  Ordination, 
without  exception,  the  particulars  of  which  are  detailed 
in  the  New  Testament  history.  And  even  in  setting 
apart  the  Deacons,  nothing  can  be  more  explicit  than 
the  statement,  that  is  was  done  with  (he  '-imposition  of 
hands."  So  far,  then,  as  we  are  bound  to  reverence  and 
follow  ancient,  primitive,  and  uniform  usage,  I  know  of 
no  solid  reason  why  it  should  be  omitted  in  any  case. 

Some,  indeed,  have  attempted  to  defend  the  omission 
of  this  rite  by  alleging,  that  the  imposition  of  hands,  in 
the  days  of  the  Apostles,  was  connected  with  the  super- 
natural gifts- of  the  Holy»Spirit,  which  were  then  com- 
mon ;  and  that  with  those  special  gifts,  it  ought  to  have 
*  eased.  In  support  of  this  allegation,  they  commonly 
adduced  such  passages  as  those  recorded  in  Acts  viii. 
1.7,  18;  xix.  6;  Heb.  vi.  2,  &c.  This  argument  how- 
ever, if  it  have  any  force,  ought  to  banish  the  imposi- 
tion  of  hands  from  all  ordinations;  but  can  never  jus- 
tify the  omission  of  it  in  ordaining  Ruling  Elders  and 
Deacons,  while  it  is  retained  in  the  ordination  of  those 
who  "labor  in  the  word  and  doctrine."  But  the  validity 
vf  the  whole  argument,  it  is  believed,  may  be  set  aside 
without  difficulty.  * 

We  read  in  the  New  Testament,  of  four  cases,  or 
kinds  of  "laying  on  of  hands."  The  first,  by  Christ 
himself,  to  express  an  authoritative  benediction;  (Matt. 
xix.  15;  Mark  x.  16;)  the  second,  in  the  healing  of 
diseases;  (Mark  xvi.  18;  ^ctaxxviii.  8;)  the  third,  in 
conferring  extraordinary  gifts  of  the  Spirit;  (Acts,  viii. 
17,  xix.  6;)  and  the  fourth,  in  setting  apart  persons 
to  sacred  office;  (Acts  vi.  6,  xiii.  3;  1  Tim.  iv.  14.) 
The  venerable  Dr.  Owen,  in  his  commentary  on  Heb. 
fld.  2,  expresses  the   opinion,  that   the  "laying  on  of 


280  ORDINATION  OF 

hands,"  mentioned  in  that  passage,  is  to  be  considered 
as  belonging  to  the  third  kind  or  class  of  cases,  and, 
of  course,  as  referring  to  the  extraordinary  gifts  of  the 
Holy  Spirit.  Others  have  supposed,  that  it  rather  be- 
longs to  the  fourth  example  here  enumerated,  and. 
therefore,  applies  to  the  ordination  of  ministers.  On 
this  point  I  decide  nothing.  But  my  reasons  for  sup- 
posing that  the  imposition  of  hands  in  the  ordination 
of  Church  Officers,  had  no  reference  to  the  imparting 
of  supernatural  gifts,  and  consequently  ought  not  to 
be  deemed  an  extraordinary  and  temporary  rite,  are 
such  as  these — 1.  This  rite  has  been  employed  in  all 
ages  of  the  Church  in  setting  .apart  persons  to  ecclesi- 
astical office.  2.  It  is  one  of  the  most  natural  and 
significant  modes  of  designating  a  person  who  is  in- 
tended to  be  consecrated  or  devoted  to  a  particular  ser- 
vice. 3.  It  was  manifestly  employed  in  a  number  of 
cases  which  occur  m  the  sacred  history,  where  no  spe- 
cial gifts  were  intended  to  be  conveyed;  and,  therefore, 
though  sometimes  connected  with  those  gifts,  yet  we 
are  sure  it  was  not  in  all  cases  thus  connected.*  4, 
i  — — — — — ■ — - 

*  "Imposition  of  hands  was  a  Jewish  ceremony,  introduced; 
not  by  any  divine  authority,  but  by  custom ;  it  being-  the  prac 
tice  among  those  people,  whenever  they  prayed  to  God  for 
any  person,  to  lay  their  hands  upon  his  head.  Our  Saviour 
observed  the  same  custom,  both  when  he  conferred  hisblessings 
on  children,  and  when  he  healed  the  sick,  adding  prayers  to 
the  ceremony.  The  Apostles  likewise  laid  hands  on  those 
upon  whom  they  bestowed  the  Holy  Ghost.  The  priests  ob- 
served the  same  custom  when  any  one  was  recived  into  their 
body.  And  the  Apostles  themselves  underwent  the  imposition 
of  hands  afresh,  whei}  they  entered  upon  any  new,  design.  In, 
the  ancient  Church  imposition  of  hands  was  even  practised  on, 
persons  when  they  were  married,;  which  custom  the  Abys-. 
sinians  stilt,  observe."-    Burdpr's  Oriental  Customs,  ii.  25. 


RULING  ELDERS.  281 

Yv^hen  hands  were  laid  on  Paul  and  Barnabas,  at 
A?Uioch,  it  was  not  that  they  might  receive  these  gifts, 
for  they  were  possessed  of  them  prior  to  this  solemnity. 
5.  In  this  case,  too,  it  is  remarkable  that  they  seem  to 
have  been  ordinary  pastors  and  teachers  who  laid 
iheir  hands  upon  one,  at  [east,  of  extraordinary  gifts 
and  character.  0.  And,  finally,  in  1  Tim.  v.  22,  the 
whole  rite  of  ordination  seems  to  be  comprehended  in 
this  act; — "Lay  hands  suddenly  on  no  man,"  &c. 
And  if  we  consider  the  act  of  laying  hands  on  the  head 
of  the  candidate  for  sacred  office,  as  intended,  at  once, 
solemnly  to  designate  his  person;  to  express  an  official 
benediction ;  and  to  indicate  his  entire  consecration  to 
the  service  of  God:- — we  could  scarcely  conceive  of  an 
act  more  simple,  and  yet  more  appropriate,  and  full  of 
meaning.  And  although  those  who  lay  on  hands  in 
this  transaction  altogether  disclaim,  as  was  before  stated, 
the  power  of  conveying  the  Holy  Ghost  to  the  indivi- 
dual ordained;  yet  as  an  emblem  of  what  he  needs, 
and  ought  unceasingly  to  seek,  and  of  what  his  brethren 
desire  and  pray  for  on  his  behalf,  it  is,  surely,  in  a  high 
degree  expressive,  and  by  no  means  open  to  the  charge 
of  either  presumption  or  superstition.  1  would  say, 
therefore,  concerning  this  part  of  the  solemnity  of  or- 
dination, in  the  language  of  the  venerable  Calvin: — 
"Although  there  is  no  express  precept  for  the  imposition 
of  hands ;  yet  since  we  find  it  to  have  been  constantly 
used  by  the  Apostles,  such  a  punctual  observance  of  it 
by  them  ought  to  have  the  force  of  a  precept  with  us. 
And  certainly  this  ceremony  is  highly  useful  both  to 
recommend  to  the  people  the  dignity  of  the  ministry, 
and  to  admonish  the  person  ordained,  that  he  is  no 
longer  his  own  master,  but  devoted  to  the  service  of  God 

and  the  Church.     Besides,  it  will  not  be  an  unmeaning 

2a2 


282,  ORDINATION  OF- 

sign,  if  it  be  restored  to  its  true  origin..  For  if  the  Spirit 
of  God  institute  nothing  in  the  Church  in  vain,  we- 
shall  perceive  that  this  ceremony,  which  proceeded  from 
Him,  is  not  without  its  use,  provided  it  be  not  perverted 
by  a  superstitious  abuse."* 

But  if  this  rite  be  so  reasonable,  so  scriptural,  so 
expressive,  and  so  generally  adopted  by  almost  all 
Christian  denominations,  in  ordaining  those  Elders  who 
"labor  in  the  word  and  doctrine;"  how  comes  it  to  pass 
that  it  it  should  be  so  generally,  not  to  say  universally 
omitted  in  the  ordination  of  Ruling  Elders?  I  have  long 
deplored  this  omission  ;t  and  cannot  help  believing  that 
the  restoration  of  so  appropriate  and  impressive  a  part 
of  the  ordaining  service  would,  in  all  probability,  be 
attended  with  beneficial  effects. 

It  is  not  easy  to  ascertain  the  origin  of  the  omission 
in  question.  The  apostolic  office  of  Ruling  Elder,  was 
preserved,  as  we  have  seen,  by  the  Witnesses  of  the  truth, 
during  the  dark  ages.  Whether  the  pious  Waldenses 
and  Bohemian  Brethren  were  in  the  habit  of  setting 
apart  this  class  of  officers  with  the  imposition  of  hands, 

*  Institutiones,  Lib.  iv.  Cap.  iii.  16. 

t  More  than  twenty  years  ago,  the  author  of  this  volume,- 
under  the  deep  and  unwavering-  conviction  that  he  had  scrip- 
tural authority  to  sustain  him,  when  called  upon  to  ordain 
Elders  and  Deacons  in  a  vacant  Church,  added  to  the  usual 
solemnity  on  such  occasions,  the  act  of  "  laying  on  hands"  in 
the  ordaining  prayer.  Finding,  however,  that  many  of  his 
Brethren  consideied  it  as  an  innovation,  and  were  by  no  means 
prepared  to  introduce  the  practice;,  believing-  that  diversity  o?V 
practice  in  relation  to  this  matter,  would  be  very  undesirable; 
and  persuaded,  moreover,  that  the  act  in  question  ought  not 
to  be  deemed  an  essential  in, any  ordination , — he  resolved  not  to 
repeat  it,  until  it  could  be  used  without  offence,  and  with,  better 
prospects  of  edification  to  the  Church. 


RULING   ELDERS.  28S' 

cannot  now,  so  far  as  I  know,  be  determined.     The 
Reformers  received  the  office  under  consideration  from 
those  pious  Waldenses;  and  were  well  aware,  as  their 
writings  evince,  that  all  ordinations  in  the  Synagogue, 
and  in  the  primitive  Church,  had  been  accompanied 
with  the  laying  on  of  hands.    Still,  however,  while  they 
with  one  accord,  retained  this  rite  in  the  ordination  of 
Teaching  Elders,  they  seem,  quite  as  unanimously,  to 
have  discarded  it  in  the  ordination  of  Riding  Elders* 
Of  the  cause  of  this,  their  writings  give  us  no  intimation • 
nor  has  it  ever  been  my  lot  to  hear,  from  any  quarter,  a 
single  reason  for  the  omission,  which  was  in  the  least, 
degree  satisfactory.     To  be  told,  that  the  omission  has 
"long  been  established  -/'—that,  while  all  the  Protestant 
Churches  in  the  world,  except  that  of  England,  receive 
this  class  of  officers,,  in  one  form  or  another,  they  are 
"no  where  ordained  by  the  imposition  of  hands;" — that 
this  is  "  the  custom  of  the  Church ;" — that  to  depart  from 
it  would  be  "to  innovate''  and  " give  offence,"  &c. — that 
this  rite  "may  be  omitted  without  injury,  not  being  an. 
essential  partof  ordination,"  &c. — is  surely  little  adapted 
to  satisfy  an  inquiring  mind,  desirous  of  receiving,  as 
well  as  of  being  able  to  give,  a  reason  for  every  practice. 
But  although,  as  has  been  already  said,  no  reason  is 
formally  assigned,  or  even  hinted,  in  the  writings  of 

•It  is  worthy  of  remark  that  our  Independent  brethren,  at 
early  periods  of  their  history,  adhered  more  closely  to  the 
scriptural  method  of  ordaining  Ruling  Elders  and  Deacons,  than 
even  Presbyterians.  See  the  Cambridge  Platform,  chapters 
vii.  and  ix.  See  also  a  Confession  of  Faith,  adopted  by  some 
Anti-paedobaptists,  (to  the  amount  of  100  congregations,)  in 
England  and  Wates,  in  1689;  and  ratified  and  adopted  by  a 
Baptist  Association  met  at  Philadelphia,  in  1742;  chapter  27. 
Also  a  "  Short  Treatise  on  Church  Discipline"  appended  to 
it  by  the  latter.     Chapters  3  and  4. 


284  ORDINATION  OF 

the  Reformers,  for  laying  aside  the  imposition  of  hands  in 
the  ordination  of  Ruling  Elders;  it  is  not,  perhaps, 
difficult  to  conjecture  how  it  happened.  One  mistake, 
I  suspect;  naturally  led  to  another.  They  began  by 
considering  the  office  as  a  temporary  one;  or,  rather 
allowing  those  who  bore  it,  if  they  saw  fit,  to  decline 
sustaining  it  for  more  than  a  single  year.  There  was 
a  new  election  of  these  Elders  annually.  The  same 
individuals,  indeed,  if  they  were  acceptable  to  the  people, 
and  were  willing  to  continue  to  serve  the  Church, 
might  be  re-elected  for  a  series  of  years,  or,  if  they 
consented,  even  for  life.  But  this  seldom  occurred. 
There  was,  for  the  most  part,  annually,  a  considerable 
change  in  the  individuals,  and,  annually,  a  new  ordina- 
tion. The  tenure  of  the  office  being  thus  temporary; 
and,  in  many  cases,  but  for  a  single  year; — no  wonder 
that  there  should  seem  to  the  discerning  and  pious  men 
who  took  the  lead  in  organizing  the  Reformed  Churches, 
some  incongruity  between  this  annual  renewal  of  the 
official  investiture  and  obligation,  and  setting  apart  men 
to  the  office  in  question,  each  time,  with  the  very  same 
formalities  which  attended  the  ordination  of  ministers 
of  the  gospel,  whose  tenure  of  office  was  for  life.  This 
incongruity,  it  is  probable,  struck  them  with  so  much 
force,  that  they  could  not  reconcile  it  with  their  feelings 
'to  set  apart  to  their  office,  these  temporary  incumbents, 
with  the  same  rites  and  solemnity  which  they  employed 
in  ordaining  ministers  of  the  Word  and  Sacraments.* 


*  This  representation  is  not  wholly  gratuitous.  It  appears 
from  the  Compendium  Theologian  Christiana  of  Jtlarck,  and 
from  the  opinion  of  Frederick  Spanheim,  quoted  with  approba- 
tion by  De  Moor,  the  Commentator  on  Marck,  that  all  three  of 
these  Divines  of  the  Reformed  Church  had  no  other  objec- 


RULING  ELDERS.  f>S;'> 

Nor  is  it  matter  of  wonder  that  such  feelings  should  have 
had  an  influence  on  their  minds.  'Those  who  take 
such  a  view  of  the  tenure  of  the  office  in  question  as 
they  did,  will  never  be  very  cordial  or  decisive  either  ia 
addressing  those  who  bear  it,  or  in  setting  them  apart, 
as  men  consecrated  for  life  to  the  service  of  the  Church.. 
But  that  in  the  Church  of  /Scotland*  and  in  the  Pres- 
byterian Church  in  this  country,  where,  it  is  believed, 
correct  views  of  the  oflice  of  Ruling  Elder,  as  perpetual,, 
are  universally  received,  the  scriptural  mode  of  setting 
apart  to  this  office  should  have  been  so  long  and  so 
generally  disused,  is  a  fact  for  which  it  is  not  easy  to 
assign  a  satisfactory  reason. 

We  are  now  prepared  to  take  a  brief  survey  of  the 
arguments  by  which  the  propriety  of  ordaining  Elders, 
by  the  imposition  of  hands  may  be  maintained.  They 
are  such  as  the  following: 

1.  We  find,  throughout  the  whole  Jewish  history,  that 
solemnly  laying  the  hands  on  the  head  of  a  person  who 
was  intended  to  be  particularly  honored^  blessed,  or 
devoted  to  sacred  functions,  was  a  rite  of  frequent,  not 
to  say  constant  use;  and  even  in  cases  in  which  the 
conveyance  of  the  miraculous  gifts  of  the  Holy  Spirit, 
could  not  possibly  have  been  designed. 

2.  The  inspired  Apostles,  in  organizing  the  New 
Testament  Church,  took  as  their  model  the  Synagogue 

tion  to  the  laying  on  of  hands  in  the  ordination  of  Ruling 
Elders,  than  that  which  I  have  suggested.  De  Moori  Com. 
Perpet.  Vol.  vi.  p.  330. 

♦  At  what  period  in  the  History  of  the  Church  of  Scotland 
it  was  tha»t  the  annual  election  of  Elders  was  laid  aside,  and  the 
office  made  permanent,  it  has  not  fallen  in  the  author's  way  to 
obtain  information.  He  is  disposed  to  believe,  however,  that 
t,he  change  took  place  either  late  in  the  sixteenth,  or  early  in, 
t^ie  seventeenth  century. 


286  ORDINATION  OP 

system  of  government,  to  which  the  first  Christians  had 
been  all  their  lives  accustomed. 

3.  It  is  certain  that  in  every  Jewish  Synagogue  there 
was  a  bench  of  Ruling  Elders;  and  it  is  just  as  certain 
that  these  Elders  were  always  ordained  by  the  impo- 
sition of  hands. 

4.  There  is  not  a  single  instance  of  an  ordination,  to 
any  ecclesiastical  office  whatever,  of  which  we  have  any 
account  in  the  New  Testament,  in  which  the  ceremony 
of  the  laying  on  of  hands  does  not  appear  to  have  been 

used. 

5.  The  first  Deacons,  though  not  intrusted  with  an 

'office  so  purely  spiritual,  or  so  ardous,  as  that  of  Ru- 
ling Elder,  were  yet,  as  all  acknowledge,  set  apait  to 
the  Diaconate  by  the  imposition  of  hands.  Of  course, 
those  who  bear  a  superior  office  ought  not  to  be  intro- 
*luced  to  it  wilh  less  solemnity. 

6.  To  imagine  that  there  is  any  peculiar  meaning  or 
mystical  influence,  in  the  laying  on  of  hands,  which  is 
above  the  dignity  of  the  Ruling  Elder's  office,  involves, 
at  once,  a  superstitious  estimate  of  a  simple,  emblemati- 
cal act,  and  an  unworthy  degradation  of  an  important 
order  in  the  Christian  family. 

Accordingly,  it  is  observable,  that  almost  all  classes 
of  writers  whose  judgment  in  reference  to  this  matter  is 
worthy  of  particular  notice,  freely  concede  the  propriety 
of  setting  apart  both  Ruling  Elders  and  Deacons  in  the 
manner  for  which  I  contend  ;  and  scarcely  offer  any 
other  reason,  for  omitting  it,  than  that  such  has  been 
i;long  the  custom"  of  the  Reformed  Churches,  and  that 
the  ceremony  is  not  u essential"  to  a  valid  ordination. 
The  following  specimen  of  the  manner  in  which  the 
subject  is  treated  by  such  writers,  will  be  quite  sufficient 
to  establish  my  position. 


RULTNG   ELDERS.  287 

The  very  learned  authors  of  the  Theses  Leydenses, 
who  were  zealous  Presbyterians,  in  speaking  of  the 
biennial  election  of  Ruling  Elders  and  Deacons,  in  the 
Church  of  Holland,  acknowledge  that,  in  the  Apostolic 
Church,  those  offices  were  both  perpetual,  and  concede 
that  the  different  plan  adopted  among  themselves  was 
an  imperfection;*  plainly  intimating,  that  their  mode 
of  ordaining  these  officers  had  grown  out  of  this  im- 
perfection. 

The  foreign  Protestants,  who  established  themselves 
in  London,  during  the  reign  of  Edward  the  sixth, 
not  only  had  Ruling  Elders  and  Deacon?,  in  all  their 
Churches;  but  also  uniformly  ordained  them  by  the 
imposition  of  hands,  as  we  have  seen  in  the  preceding 
chapter. 

The  Rev.  John  Anderson,  of  Scotland,  the  able 
and  zealous  defender  of  Presbyterianism  against Rhind, 
who  lived  a  little  more  than  a  century  ago,  speaking  of 
the  ordination  of  Ruling  Elders  by  the  imposition  of 
hands,  has  the  following  passage.  "  Nobody  doubts  it 
is  very  lawful;  and,  for  my  own  part,  I  heartily 
wish  it  were  practised  ;  but  I  deny  that  it  is 
absolutely  necessary,  there  being  no  precept  enjoining 
it."t 

The  Rev.  Archibald  Hall,  also  of  Great  Britain, 
and  a  thorough-going  advocate  for  Presbyterian  order, 
speaks  on  the  same  subject  in  the  following  terms.  "The 
call  of  Ruling  Elders,  like  the  call  of  the  Elders  who 
"labor  in  the  word  and  doctrine,"  consists  in  two  things, 
viz.,  election  and  ordination.  Their  election  should 
be  popular,  and  their  ordination  judicial,  and  per- 

*  Synopsis  Purioris  Theologicce.  Dispuf.  42.  p.  621. 
f  Defence,  &c.  Chap.  ii.  Sect.  vi.  p.   179. 


"288  ORDINATION  OF 

formed  with  laying  on  of  hands."  And,  in  a 
subsequent  page,  he  expresses  an  opinion  that  Deacons 
ought  to  be  ordained  in  the  same  manner* 

The  venerable  John  Brown,  of  Haddington,  one  of 
the  most  decisive,  consistent  and  devoted  Presbyterians 
that  ever  lived ; — after  giving  an  acount  of  the  nature 
and  warrant  of  the  office  of  Ruling  Elders, — observes; — 
"Their  ordination  ought  to  be  transacted  in  much  the 
same  manner,  as  that  of  teaching  Elders,  or  Pastors."t 

The  learned  and  pious  Dr.  Cotton  Mather,  delivers 
the  following  opinion  on  the  subject  before  us.  "The 
imposition  of  hands  in  the  ordination  of  a  Church  officer, 
is  a  rite  not  only  lawful  to  be  retained ;  but  it  seems  by 
a  divine  institution  directed  and  required;  so  that 
although  the  call  of  a  person  to  Church  office  may  not 
become  null  and  void,  where  that  rite  may  have  been 
omitted,  as  it  is  in  the  Senoirs  and  Deacons  in 
most  of  the  Reformed  Churches;  yet  we  can- 
not approve  the  omission  of  it.  A  ceremonial 
defect  may  be  blameworthy ."+ 

Our  excellent  and  eloquent  countryman,  the  Rev. 
President  Dwight,  gives  an  opinion  concerning  the 
ordination  of  Deacons,  which  is  decisive  of  his  opinion 
concerning  that  of  Ruling  Elders,  in  favor  of  which 
latter  class  of  officers,  he  very  explicitly,  as  we  have 
before  seen,  declares  his  judgment.     He  speaks  thus : — 

"Deacons  are  to  be  ordained  by  the  imposition  of 
hands,  and  by  prayer.*' 

"When  the  brethren  had  set  these  men  before  the 


*  Scriptural  View  of  the  Gospel  Church,  Chapters  12  and  15. 
p.  67.  102. 

f  Compendous  View.  Book  vii.  Chapter  ii.  p.  640. 
J  Magnalia,  Vol.  ii.  p.  218. 


RULING   ELDERS,  289 

Apostles,  St.  Luke  informs  us,"  they  prayed,  and  laid 
their  hands  upon  them." 

"This  also  is  an  authoritative  example  of  the  man- 
ner in  which  Deacons  are  to  he  introduced  into  every 
Church.  It  is  the  example  of  inspired  men  ;  and  was, 
therefore,  the  pleasure  of  the  Spirit  of  God.  There  is 
no  hint  in  the  New  Testament,  nor  even  in  ecclesiasti- 
cal history,  that  they  were  ever  introduced  in  any  other 
manner.  At  the  same  time,  there  is  no  precept,  re- 
voking, or  altering  the  authority,  or  inllucnce  of  this 
example.  It  stands,  therefore,  in  full  force;  and  re- 
quires that  all  persons  chosen  hy  the  Church  to  this  office, 
should  be  consecrated  to  the  duties  of  it  in  the  same 
manner." 

"It  is  to  be  observed,  further, that  if  any  such  altera- 
tion had  existed  in  periods  subsequent  to  the  apostolic 
age,  it  would  have  been  totally  destitute  of  any  authority 
to  us.  This  mode  of  consecration  has,  in  fact,  been 
disused  in  New-England,  to  a  considerable  extent. 
For  this,  however,  there  seems  to  have  been  no  reason 
of  any  value.  So  far  as  I  have  been  able  to  gain 
information  on  the  subject,  the  disuse  was  originated 
at  first,  and  has  been  gradually  extended  by  mere 
inattention;  nor  is  it  capable,  so  far  as  i  know, 

OF   ANY  DEFENCE."* 

These  are  a  few  of  the  authorities  which  might  be 
quoted  in  favor  of  the  same  general  position.  In  fact, 
I  have  met  with  no  Presbvterian  or  Independent  writer, 
who  believed  in  the  propriety  of  the  imposition  of  hands 
in  any  case  of  ordination,  who  did  not  either  explicitly, 
or  virtually  grant,  that  there  was  no  reason  for  with- 
holding this  ceremony  in  the  case  of  Ruling  Elders,  but 

*  Theology  explained  and  defended.     Vol.  iv.  p.  291. 

2b 


290  ORDINATION  OP 

the  custom  of  the  Church,  or  some  similar  considera- 
tion. 

On  the  supposition,  then,  that  the  imposition  of  hands 
ought  always  to  be  employed  in  the  ordination  of  Ru- 
ling Elders,  the  question  naturally  arises; — Whose 
hands  ought  to  be  laid  on  in  such  ordinations?  And 
here,  if  we  attend  to  the  simplest  principles  of  all 
government,  it  would  seem  that  we  could  scarcely  be  at 
a  loss  for  a  satisfactory  answer. 

It  seems  to  be  a  fundamental  principle  in  every 
department,  both  of  the  natural  and  moral  world,  that 
every  thing  must  be  considered  as  capable  of  begetting 
its  like.  If  this  be  so,  does  it  not  follow,  as  a  plain 
dictate  of  common  sense,  that,  in  ordaining  Ruling  El- 
ders, the  members  of  the  Session  already  in  office  should 
lay  on  hands,  with  the  Pastor,  in  setting  apart  an  ad- 
ditional number  to  the  same  office?  In  other  words,  if 
there  be  such  a  body  already  in  existence  in  the  Church. 

THE  HANDS  OF  THE  PAROCHIAL  PRESBYTERY  OUght 

to  be  laid  on,  in  adding  to  its  own  number; — and  the 
"right  hand  of  fellowship"  given,  at  the  close  of  the 
service,  by  each  member  of  the  Session,  to  each  of  his 
newly  ordained  brethren.  This  appears  to  me  equally 
agreeable  to  reason  and  Scripture,  and  highly  adapted 
to  edification.  And  if  there  be  no  Eldership  already  in 
the  Church  in  which  the  ordination  takes  place, — then 
the  Presbytery,  upon  proper  application  being  made  to 
them,  ought  to  appoint  at  least  one  minister,  and  two  or 
more  Ruling  Elders,  to  attend,  at  the  time  and  place 
most  convenient,  to  perform  the  ordination.  How  much 
more  impressive  and  acceptable  would  be  such  a  scene, 
than  the  cold  and  naked  manner  in  which  this  service 
is  too  often  performed ! 

A  question  may  here  arise  in  the  minds  of  some, 


RULING   ELDERS.  291 

whether  those  Elders  who,  when  ordained,  had  no  hands 
laid  on  them,  may,  without  impropriety,  join  in  the  im- 
position of  hands  on  the  heads  of  their  younger  brethren, 
who  may  be  ordained  in  this  manner?  To  this  ques- 
tion, beyond  all  doubt,  we  may  confidently  return  an 
affirmative  answer.  They  may  unite  in  the  imposition 
of  bands,  without  the  least  scruple,  and  with  the  utmost 
propriety.  All  reasonable  men  grant,  that  the  rite  in 
question,  though  rational  and  scriptural,  is  not  essential 
to  a  valid  ordination.  Our  venerable  Fathers  of  the 
Scotch  Reformation  did  not  deem  the  imposition  of 
hands  necessary,  even  in  the  ordination  of  Ministers 
of  t  ho  gospel :  and,  therefore,  in  their  First  Book  of  Dis- 
cipline did  not  prescribe  it.  Elders,  therefore,  who  have 
been  regularly  set  apart  to  their  office,  agreeably  to  the 
Formula  prescribed  in  the  Presbyterian  Church,  have 
received  an  ordination  completely  valid.  They  are  fully 
invested  with  the  office,  and  with  all  the  powers  and 
privileges  which  it  includes.  It  is  contrary  to  the  whole 
genius  of  the  gospel  to  make  a  mere  ceremonial  defect 
fatal  to  the  substance  of  an  otherwise  regular  investiture. 
If  Elders  who  have  been  thus  ordained,  be  deemed 
competent  to  any  part  of  their  official  work,  they  are 
competent  to  every  part;  and,  of  course,  to  partake 
in  the  solemnity  which  I  am  here  endeavoring  to 
recommend. 

If  the  foregoing  principles  be  correct,  then  Ruling 
J^lders  ought  also  to  lay  on  hands,  with  the  Pastor,  in 
the  ordination  of  Deacons;  their  office  as  Rulers  vest- 
ing them  with  full  power  for  this  act,  and  rendering  it 
strictly  proper.  But  inasmuch  as  Deacons  make  no 
part  of  the  parochial  presbytery,  and  are  not  vested 
with  any  portion  of  the  function  of  spiritual  govern- 
ment: it  does  not  seem,  proper  that  they  should  lay  on 


292  ORDINATION  OF 

hands  in  any  case  of  ordination.  In  that  of  Ruling 
Elders,  it  would  be  manifestly  incongruous ;  since  their 
office  is  altogether  unlike.  But  even  in  the  ordination 
of  Deacons,  it  would  be  inconsistent  with  regular  order. 
Ordination  is  an  act  not  only  official,  but  also  authori- 
tative. It  is  an  act  of  government:  but  to  no  partici- 
pation in  this  are  Deacons  appointed.  This  office,  as 
we  have  seen,  is  highly  important,  and  requires  much 
wisdom,  piety,  pruJence,  and  diligence;  but  their 
sphere  of  duty  is  entirely  different  from  that  of  those 
who  are  "set  over  the  flock  in  the  Lord,"  and  who  are 
appointed  to  "watch  for  souls  as  they  that  must  give 
account." 

If,  after  this  whole  discussion,  any  should  be  dis- 
posed to  ask,  what  additional  advantage  may  be  ex- 
pected to  flow  from  ordaining  our  Elders  by  the  impo- 
sition of  hands,  and  with  similar  external  solemnities 
to  those  which  are  employed  in  setting  apart  ministers 
of  the  gospel? — I  answer — It  will  be  a  return  to  scrip- 
tural example,  and  primitive  usage, — which  is  always 
right,  and  will,  we  have  reason  to  hope,  by  the  grace 
of  God,  bd  connected  with  a  blessing.     It  will  be  doing 
warranted  and  appropriate  honor  to  a  class  of  officers 
too  long  deprived  of  their  due  estimation  and  authority. 
When  the  people  see  these  whom,  they  have  elected  to 
this  office,  devoutly  kneeling  before  the  Lord,  and  the 
hands  of  the  parochial  Presbytery  laid  on  their  heads, 
with  fervent  prayer,  and  with  a  solemn  charge  and 
benediction; — they  will  naturally  attach  to  the  office 
itself  more  importance,  and  to  those  who  bear  it,  more 
reverence.     Nay,  perhaps  it  is  not  unreasonable  to  be- 
lieve, that  such  solemnities  may  be  made  the  means  of 
salutary  impressions  on  the  minds  even  of  their  imme- 
diate subjects.     If  the  writer  of  these  lines  does  not. 


RULING   ELDERS. 


293 


greatly  mistake,  he  has  known  the  solemnities  attend 
ing  the  ordination  of  Pastors,  productive  of  deep  and 
lasting  impressions,  both  on  the  ordained,  and  the 
spectators.  But  he  has  no  recollection  of  ever  wit- 
nessing any  such  result  from  our  comparatively  cold 
and  lifeless  mode  of  setting  apart  the  official  Rulers  in 
Christ's  house.  "  This  is  a  lamentation,  and  shall  be 
for  a  lamentation." 


2b2 


CHAPTER  XIV* . 

OP  THE  RESIGNATION  OP  RULING  ELDERS; — THEIR 

REMOVAL    FROM     ONE     CHURCH    TO     ANOTHER; 

AND    THE    METHOD    OF  CONDUCTING ,  DISCIPLINE 
AGAINST  THEM. 

As  it  is  a  fundamental  principle  of  the  Presbyterian. 
Church  that  the  office  of  Ruling  Elder  is  permanent; 
that  when  a  man  is  once  set  apart  to  it,  he  is  always 
an  Elder,  while  he  lives,  unless  deposed  by  regular 
constitutional  process ; — a  variety  of  questions,  naturally 
resulting  from  this  principle,  claim  our  notice.  Among 
these,  some  of  the  more  obvious  and  important  will  be 
briefly  considered  in  the  present  chapter. 

A  Ruling  Elder,  after  -being  regularly  and  solemnly 
set  apart  to  his  office,  with,  perhaps,  as  full  an  intention 
of  faithfully  performing  its  duties  to  his  life's  end,  as 
ever  man  had; — may  lose  his  health,  and  thus  become 
physically  and  permanently  unable  to  perform  those 
duties*  Or  he  may  become,  unavoidably,  so  situated, 
with  regard  to.  his  temporal  business  as  to  render  the 
regular  fulfilment  of  his  duties  altogether  impracticable. 
In  this  case,  the  individual  supposed,  may  resign  his 
place  in  the  Session;  in  other  words,  he  may  cease  to 
be  an  acting  Overseer,  or  Inspector  and  Ruler  of  that 
Church.  He  will,  of  course,  still  retain  his  place  and 
privileges  as  a  regular  member  of  the  Church;  but  he 


RULING   ELDERS.  295 

will  no  longer  take  any  part  in  its  spiritual  government. 
This  is  so  reasonable  a  provision,  that  it  can  scarcely  be 
thought  to  require  either  illustration  or  defence.  We 
all  know  that  a  Teaching  Elder,  or  Minister  of  the 
Word  and  Sacraments,  after  being  for  a  time  a  Pastor, 
may,  if  the  state  of  his  health,  or  any  other  circum- 
stance should  imperiously  demand  it,  resign  his  pastoral 
charge,  and  retire,  as  long  as  the  cause  of  his  resigna- 
tion continues  to.  operate,  to  private  life.  He  who  does 
this,  it  is  well  known,  though  he  ceases  to  be  a  Pastor, 
still  continues  to  be  a  minister,  fully  invested  with  the 
powers  of  an  '-Ambassador  of  Christ."  He  may  still, 
if  he  think  proper,  reside  within  the  bounds  of  the  con- 
gregation which  he  formerly  served ;  and  he  may, 
occasionally,  if  mutually  convenient  and  agreeable, 
minister  to  them  in  sacred  things.  But  he  is  no  longer 
their  minister ;  and  he  may  never  think  proper  again 
to  take  a  pastoral  charge. 

All  these  principles  apply  to  the  Ruling  Elder.  If  he 
verily  think  that  he  cannot  any  longer  perform  the  duties 
of  his  office  in  a  manner  acceptable  either  to  the  Head, 
of  the  Church,  or  to  his  people; — he  may  withdraw 
from  active  service.  When  he  does  this,  howrever,  he 
does  not  lay  down  his  office,  He  does  not  cease  to  be 
an  Elder.  He  only  ceases  to  be  an  acting  Elder.  If 
his  health  should  evei  be  restored,  or  his  temporal  cir- 
cumstances undergo  a  favorable  alteration,  he  may 
resume  the  duties  of  his  office,  and  again  take  his  place 
in  the  Session  from  which  he  withdrew,  or  some  other, 
without  a  new  ordination.  When  an  Elder  thus  wishes 
to  resign  his  station,  he  is  to  give  official  notice  of  his 
desire  to  the  Session ; — they  are  to  declare  if  they  think 
proper,  their  acceptance  of  his  resignation ; — the  whole 
transaction  is  to  be  distinctly  recorded  in  the  Sessional 


296  RESIGNATION.  &C,  OF 


Book; — and  report  made  to  the  Presbytery  that  the 
individual  in  question  has  ceased  to  be  an  acting  mem- 
ber of  that  Session. 

Again ;  an  Elder  may  become  wholly  incapable  of 
serving  the  Church  with  which  he  is  connected,  by  the 
entire  loss  of  his  popularity.  He  may  not  have  become 
either  heterodox  in  his  theological  opinions,  or  so  irregu- 
lar in  any  part  of  his  practice,  as  to  render  himself  liable 
to  process  or  deposition  from  office: — and  yet  he  may, 
by  indiscretions,  or  by  undignified  conduct,  so  lose  the 
respect  and  confidence  of  the  people;  or,  in  a  moment  of 
prejudice  or  passion,  the  popular  feeling,  without  any 
just  ground  of  blame  on  his  part,  may  be  so  strong 
against  him,  that  he  may  be  no  longer  able  to  serve  the 
Church  either  acceptably,  or  to  edification,  as  a  spiritual 
Ruler.  In  either  of  these  cases,  he  ought  voluntarily 
to  resign  his  place  in  the  Session,  as  stated  in  the  pre- 
ceding paragraph ;  and  the  Session,  after  taking  a  vole 
of  acceptance  on  the  resignation,  ought  distinctly  to 
record  the  same  in  the  minutes  of  their  proceedings, 
and  make  regular  report  of  it,  for  the  information  of 
the  Presbytery.  In  all  this  there  will  be  recognized 
an  almost  exact  similarity  to  the  usual  course  of  pro- 
ceeding, when  a  Pastor  is  sensible  that  he  has  become 
unpopular,  and  wishes  to  resign  his  charge. 

It  may  be,  however,  that  the  Elder,  whose  popularity 
is  thus  prostrated,  may  not  be  sensible  of  his  real  situa- 
tion ;  may  be  unwilling  to  believe  that  he  is  not  popu- 
lar; and  may,  therefore,  refuse,  even  when  requested, 
to  resign  his  station.  In  this  case,  the  course  prescribed 
in  our  Form  of  Government,  is,  that  the  Session  make 
due  report  of  the  whole  matter  to  the  Presbytery,  giving 
due  notice  to  the  Elder  in  question  of  the  time  and 
place  at  which  it  is  intended  to  make  the  report;  and 


RULING   ELDERS.  297 

that  the  Presbytery  decide,  after  due  inquiry  and  de- 
liberation, whether  lie  ought  to  resign,  or  continue  his 
connexion  with  the  Session.  On  the  one  hand,  no 
(  'liurch  ought  to  he  burdened  hy  the  incumbency  of  an 
unpopular  and  obstinate  Elder,  who,  instead  of  edifying, 
is  injuring  it.  And,  on  the  other  hand,  no  innocent 
and  really  exemplary  Elder  ought  to  be  abandoned  to 
the  fury  of  popular  prejudice,  and  permitted  to  be  tram- 
pled under  feet,  when,  perhaps,  he  ought  to  be  sustained 
and  honored  for  his  fidelity. 

Further ;  Ruling  Elders,  like  other  Church  members,, 
may  find  it  their  duty  to  remove  their  residence  from  the 
bounds  of  the  Church  which  called  them  to  office,  to 
another.  Such  cases  not  un frequently  arise.  The 
question  is,  when  they  do  occur,  how  is  the  official 
standing  of  such  a  removing  Elder  to  be  disposed  of 1 
He,  of  course,  when  he  goes,  ought  to  take  with  him 
a  regular  certificate  of  good  standing,  as  a  private 
Christian,  and  a  dismission  and  recommendation  to  the 
Church  to  which  he  removes.  The  certificate  ought 
also  to  bear  an  attestation  of  his  regular  standing  as  an 
Elder,  and  of  his  official  as  well  as  personal  dismission 
from  his  former  Church.  With  this  certificate  he  will 
repair  to  the  Church  to  which  he  is  recommended,  and 
will,  of  course,  be  received  as  a  private  member  in  good 
standing.  If  the  existing  Eldership  and  members  of  the 
Church  to  which  he  removes,  think  it  for  their  edifica- 
tion that  he  be  introduced  into  their  Session,  he  may 
be  elected  in  the  manner  ':most  approved  and  in  use  in 
that  congregation;" — that  is,  either  by  a  nomination  by 
the  Session,  or  by  a  popular  vote  of  the  Church  mem- 
bers; and  if  thus  elected,  introduced  to  an  official  rela- 
tion to  that  people,  not  by  a  new  ordination,  which 
ought  never  to  be  repeated :    but  by  being  regularly 


298  RESIGNATION,  &C,  OF 

installed  as  their  Elder.  This  is  effected  by  the  can- 
didate appearing  in  the  face  of  the  congregation,  as  one 
about  to  be  ordained : — answering  in  the  affirmative  the 
Fourth  question  directed  to  be  put  to  candidates  for 
the  Eldership  at  their  ordination; — the  members  of  the 
congregation  publicly  professing  to  receive  him  as  their 
spiritual  Ruler,  agreeably  to  the  last  Question,  in  the 
same  formula;  declaring  him  one  of  the  Ruling  Elders 
of  that  Church:  and  closing  with  prayer  ior  the  divine 
blessing  on  the  transaction. 

It  may  be,  however,  that  when  an  individual,  who 
lias  served  one  Congregation  as  an  Elder,  removes  into 
the  bounds  of  another,  that  other  may  not,  on  the  whole, 
think  best  to  elect  him  as  one  of  their  Elders.  They 
may  already  have  as  many  as  they  think  there  ought 
to  be  in  one  Church.  Or  his  character,  though  unex- 
ceptionably  good,  may  not  be  such  as  to  promise  great 
benefit  by  taking  him  into  their  parochial  Presbytery. 
In  this  case,  they  are  under  no  obligation  to  elect  him 
one  of  their  Elders.  And  if  they  de  not  think  best  to 
employ  him  in  his  character,  he  may  live  among  them 
as  a  private  member  of  the  Church.  At  this  he  ought 
to  take  no  offence.  It  would  be  a  hard  case,  indeed,  if 
Churches  were  not  left  at  liberty  to  act  agreeably  to 
their  own  views  of  propriety  and  duty  in  such  cases. 
If  a  preaching  Elder,  or  Pastor,  be  liberated  from  his 
pastoral  charge,  and  remove  his  residence  within  lite 
bounds  of  another  Church,  however  excellent  his 
character,  that  Church  is  not  bound  to  employ  him.  To 
suppose  it  bound,  would  indeed  be  ecclesiastical  slavery. 
A  preacher  inferior  to  him,  in  every  respect,  might  be 
preferred.  Every  Church  must  be  left  to  its  own 
unbiassed  choice.  Still  the  Elder,  as  well  as  the 
minister,  in  the  case  supposed,  though  in  retirement, 


RULING  ELDERS.  299 

nnd  without  official  employment,  retains  his  office,  and 
is  capable  of  being  employed  in  that  office,  whenever 
the  judicatories  of  the  Church  think  proper  to  avail 
themselves  of  his  service-'. 

When  Ruling  Elders  become  chargeable  with  heresy 
or  immorality,  and,  of  course,  liable  to  the  discipline 
of  the  Church,  they  are  amenable  to  the  bar  of  the 
Church  Session.  By  that  body  they  are  to  be  arraigned 
and  tried.  Process  against  them  is  to  be  conducted 
according  to  the  same  general  rules  which  regulate  the 
trial  of  private  members  of  the  Church,  excepting  thai, 
as  their  character  is,  in  some  respects,  more  important, 
and  their  example  more  influential,  than  the  character 
and  example  of  those  who  bear  no  office  in  the  Church ; 
so  there  ought  to  be  peculiar  caution,  tenderness,  and 
care  in  receiving  accusations,  and  in  commencing  pro- 
cess against  them.  '•  Against  an  Elder,"  says  the  in- 
spired Paid,  "receive  not  an  accusation,  but  before  two 
or  three  witnesses."  If,  therefore,  any  person  observe 
or  hear  of  any  thing  in  a  Ruling  Elder  which  he  con- 
siders as  rendering  him  justly  liable  to  censure,  he  ought 
by  no  means  immediately  to  spread  it  abroad;  but  to  com- 
municate what  he  has  observed  or  heard  to  the  Pastor 
of  the  Church,  and  take  his  advice  as  to  the  proper 
course  to  be  pursued;  and  if  the  Pastor  cannot  be  seen 
and  consulted,  then  similar  consultalion  and  advice 
should  be  had  with  one,  at  least,  of  the  brother  Elders 
of  the  supposed  delinquent :  and  all  this,  before  any 
hint  rsepecting  the  alleged  delinquency  is  lisped  to  any 
other  human  being. 

As  the  Church  Session  is  the  tribunal  to  which  the 
Ruling  Elder  is,  at  least  in  the  first  instance,  always 
amenable ;  so  it  is  generally  proper  that  he  should  be 
tried  by  that  judicatory.     Yet  where  there  is  any  thing 


300  RESIGNATION,  &C,  OF 

peculiar  or  delicate  in  the  case  of  process  against  art 
Elder,  a  Presbytery  should  be  consulted. 

There  are  cases,  however,  so  very  peculiar  as  to  pre- 
clude the  possibility  of  an  impartial  trial,  and  sometimes^ 
indeed,  of  any  trial  at  all,  before  the  Session.  A  few 
such  cases  may  be  specified. 

An  instance  occurred,  a  few  years  since,  in  which 
there  were  only  two  Elders  in  a  certain  Church  Session, 
and  the  moral  conduct  of  both  these  Elders  became 
impeached.  It  was,  of  course,  impossible  to  try  them 
in  the  usual  manner. 

In  another  case,  the  Session  was  composed  of  two 
Elders  beside  the  Pastor.  These  Elders  were  own 
brothers.  One  of  them  was  charged  with  immoral 
couduct;  and  it  was  judged  altogether  improper  that 
any  attempt  should  be  made  to  try  the  delinquent  in 
that  Session. 

In  a  third  class  of  cases,  when  process  against  mem- 
bers  of  Church  Sessions  had  been  commenced,  it  was 
found  that  so  many  of  the  brother  Elders  of  the  delin- 
quents were  cited  as  witnesses,  that  there  was  no  pros- 
pect of  a  dispassionate  and  impartial  trial  by  the  re- 
mainder. 

In  all  these  cases,  it  was  wisely  judged  proper  to  ap- 
ply immediately  to  the  Presbytery,  to  take  the  several 
causes  in  hand,  and  to  commence  and  issue  process. 

It  has  been  sometimes  proposed,  in  exigencies  similar 
to  those  which  have  been  stated,  without  applying  to 
the  Presbytery,  to  call  in  the  aid  of  the  Eldership  of  a 
neighboring  Church,  and  to  submit  the  case  to  their 
decision.  To  this  course  there  are  two  objections. 
First — the  Constitution  of  the  Presbyterian  Church 
knows  of  no  such  body.  It  has  no  where  provided  for 
the  formation  of  a  parochial  tribunal  in  such  a  manner. 


RULING  ELDERS.  301 

And,  secondly,  the  adoption  of  this  plan  would  be  to 
set  one  Church  as  a  judge  over  a  neighboring  sister 
Church. 

To  avoid  this  incongruity,  it  has  been  sometimes 
proposed  to  form  a  tribunal  for  the  trial  of  delinquent 
Elders,  by  selecting  one  or  two  of  the  same  class  of 
officers,  from  each  of  several  neighboring  Sessions.  This 
was  intended  as  an  expedient  to  avoid  the  impropriety 
of  setting  one  Church  in  judgment  over  another.  But 
this  expedient,  besides  that  it  is  unauthorized  by  any 
constitutional  provision,  is  liable  to  the  charge  of  a 
selection  of  judges  which  may  not  always  be  fair  and 
impartial.  It  is  far  better  on  every  account,  and  espe- 
cially more  in  harmony  with  the  nature  of  the  case, 
and  with  the  spirit  of  our  general  principles, — to  go 
immediately  to  the  Presbytery.  That  body  is  the 
natural  resort  in  all  cases  in  which  the  Church  Session 
is  unable,  in  its  ordinary  structure  and  situation,  to 
perform  the  contemplated  work, 


2  c 


CHAPTER  XV. 

ADVANTAGES    OF  CONDUCTING   DISCIPLINE    ON  T£tl5 
PRESBYTERIAN   PLAN. 

It  is  not  forgotten,  in  entering  on  this  chapter,  that 
most  denominations  of  Christians  are  so  far  prejudiced, 
and  sometimes  so  blindly  prejudiced,  in  favor  of  their 
own  particular  government  and  formularies,  that  their 
judgment  in  reference  to  this  matter,  can  seldom  be 
regarded  as  impartial.  The  writer  of  this  Essay,  though 
he  does  not  allow  himself  to  indulge  in  such  prejudices, 
yet,  does  not  claim  to  be  wholly  free  from  them.  Instead, 
therefore,  of  troubling  the  reader  with  his  bare  impres- 
sions and  preferences  in  regard  to  the  Presbyterian  mode 
of  conducting  discipline,  which  would,  of  course,  go  for 
nothing ;  it  is  proposed  to  present  such  a  series  of 
principles  and  reasonings  as  will  enable  the  intelligent 
inquirer  to  judge  for  himself,  how  far  the  conclusions 
of  the  writer  are  sustained  by  solid  argument. 

,L  And,  in  the  first  place,  the  plan  of  discipline  for 
which  we  plead,  is  founded,  essentially,  on  the  principle 
of  Representation,  which,  in  a  greater  or  less  degree, 
pervades  all  human  society.  When  a  community  of 
any  extent  wishes  to  frame  laws  for  its  own  government, 
by  whom  is  this  service  usually  performed?  By  the 
whole  body  of  citizens,  wise  and  unwise,  orderly  and 
disorderly,  coming  together,  and  debating  on  the  pro- 


THIS   PLAN.  303 

pricty  and  the  form  of  every  proposed  enactment?  No, 
never.  An  attempt  of  this  kind  would  soon  show  the 
plan  to  be  equally  foolish  and  impracticable.  Again; 
when  a  Court  is  to  be  formed,  for  applying  the  laws 
already  in  force,  to  human  actions,  of  what  materials  is 
this  tribunal  commonly  composed?  Does  any  one  ever 
think  of  summoning  the  whole  mass  of  the  male  popula- 
tion, excepting  the  culprit,  or  the  complainant,  whose 
cause  is  to  be  tried,  to  come  together,  and  decide  on  the 
case?  Who  would  ever  expect  either  a  tranquil  or  a 
wise  decision  from  such  a  judicial  assembly?  In  both 
these  cases,  the  good  sense  of  men.  in  all  civilized  society, 
dictates  the  choice  of  a  select  number  of  individuals, 
representatives  of  the  whole  body,  and  supposed  to  pos- 
sess a  competent  share  of  knowledge,  wisdom  and  integ- 
rity, to  form  the  laws  of  the  community;  and  another 
body,  smaller,  indeed,  but  constituted  upon  similar 
principles,  judicially  to  apply  them  when  enacted.  And 
so  in  every  department  of  society.  The  representative 
system  was  one  of  the  earliest  that  appeared  in  the  pro- 
gress of  mankind.  It  is  recommended  by  its  reasonable- 
ness, its  convenience,  its  wisdom,  and  its  efficiency.  In 
fact,  the  more  deeply  we  look  into  the  history  and  state 
of  the  world,  the  more  clearly  we  shall  see  that  large 
bodies  of  men  cannot  take  a  step  without  it. 

And,  as  this  system  pervades  all  civil  society;  so  we 
may  say,  without  fear  of  contradiction,  that  it  equally 
pervades  the  whole  economy  of  Redemption  and  Grace. 
Is  it  not  reasonable,  then,  that  we  should  find  it  in  the 
visible  Church?  If  we  did  not,  it  would,  indeed,  be  a 
strange  departure  from  a  general  principle  of  Jehovah's 
kingdom. 

The  Presbyterian  plan,  then,  of  conducting  the 
government  of  each  congregation,  is  recommended  by 


304  ADVANTAGES  OF 

its  conformity  with  this,  almost  universal,  principle.  It 
deposits  the  power  of  applying  the  laws  which  Christ 
has  enacted,  and  given  to  his  people; — not  with  the 
whole  professing  population  of  the  Church ;  but  with  a 
select  body  of  the  communicants,  most  distinguished 
for  their  piety,  knowledge,  judgment,  and  experience. 
It  does  not  make  judges  indiscriminately  of  the  young 
and  old,  the  enlightened  and  the  ignorant,  the  wise  and 
the  unwise.  It  selects  the  exemplary,  the  pious,  the 
prudent,  the  grave,  and  the  experienced,  for  this  impor- 
tant work.  "  It  sets  those  to  judge  who  are  most  es- 
teemed in  the  house  of  God."  This  is  the  theory;  and, 
in  most  cases,  we  may  suppose,  the  actual  practice. 
And  where  it  is  really  so,  who  does  not  see  that  there 
is  every  security  which  the  nature  of  the  case  admits, 
that  the  judgment  will  be  most  calm,  judicious  and 
edifying,  that  the  amount  of  wisdom  and  of  piety  in 
that  Church  could  pronounce? 

The  inconvenience,  nay,  the  positive  mischiefs,  of 
committing  the  judgment,  in  the  most  delicate  and  diffi- 
cult cases  of  implicated  Christian  character,  to  the  whole 
mass  of  Christian  professors,  have  been  alluded  to  in  a 
preceding  chapter.  And  the  more  closely  they  are 
examined,  the  more  serious  will  they  appear.  No  confi- 
dential precaution ;  no  calm,  retired  inquiry ;  no  delibe- 
rate consultation  of  sensitive  feelings,  with  fidelity,  and 
yet  with  fraternal  delicacy,  can  possibly  take  place,  in  or- 
didary  cases,  but  by  the  adoption  of  an  expedient,  which 
amounts  to  the  temporary  appointment  of  Elders.  On 
the  contrary,  upon  any  other  plan,  the  door  is  wide  open 
for  tale-bearing;  for  party  heat;  for  the  violation  of  all 
those  nicer  sensibilities,  which  in  Christian  society,  are 
of  so  much  value ;  and  after  all,  for  a  decision  with 
which,  perhaps,  no  one  is  satisfied.    It  would,  truly,  be 


THIS   PLAN.  305 

passing  strange,  if  a  sober,  wise,  and  consistent  decision 
should  be  pronounced  by  such  a  tribunal.  We  are 
surely,  then,  warranted  in  setting  it  down  as  one  of 
the  manifest  advantages  of  conducting  discipline  on  the 
Presbyterian  plan,  that,  by  the  adoption  of  the  repre- 
sentative system,  it  provides,  in  all  ordinary  cases,  for 
the  purest,  the  wisest,  and  the  most  edifying  decisions 
oi  which  the  nature  of  the  case  admits. 

II.  Further;  as  was  hinted,  in  a  preceding  chapter, 
this  method  of  conducting  discipline,  presents  one 
OF  THE  FIRMEST  conceivable  barriers  against 

THE  AMBITION  AND  ENCROACHMENTS  OF  THE  CLER- 

gy.  It  is  not  intended  again  to  enlarge  on  the  liable- 
ness  of  ministers  of  the  gospel  to  feel  that  love  of  power 
which  is  natural  to  man.  Very  few  of  them,  it  is 
believed,  in  this  land  of  religious  liberty,  have  ever  really 
aimed  at  ecclesiastical  encroachment.  But  as  laws  are 
made  for  the  disobedient ;  and  as  ministers  are  but  men ; 
so  that  system  of  ecclesiastical  polity  may  be  considered 
as  the  best,  which,  while  it  is  attended  with  the  great- 
est arnount  of  positive  advantage,  is  adapted  most 
effectually  to  obviate  those  evils  to  which  human  nature 
is  exposed. 

Now,  it  is  evident,  that  the  method  of  conducting  dis- 
cipline at  present  under  consideration,  assigns  to  every 
Pastor  a  Council,  or  Senate  of  pious,  wise,  prudent  men, 
chosen  from  among  the  body  of  the  communicants;  and 
though  not  strictly  lay-men,  yet  commonly  so  viewed, 
and,  at  any  rate,  carrying  with  them  the  feelings  of  the 
mass  of  their  brethren.  He  is  simply  the  Chairman  of 
this  body  of  six,  eight  or  ten  men,  who  are  charged 
with  the  whole  spiritual  rule,  and  "without  whose 
counsel  nothing  is  done  in  the  Church."  He  can  carry 
no  measure  but  with  their  consent    He  can  neither 

2c  2 


306  ADVANTAGES  OP 

admit  nor  exclude  a  single  member,  without  their 
concurrence.  If  he  engage  in  any  sinister  or  foul  planr 
as  many  are  fond  of  supposing  the  clergy  inclined  to 
attempt,  he  certainly  cannot  accomplish  it,  either  in  his 
own  Church,  or  in  neighboring  Churches,  unless  he 
can  prevail  on  these  men  to  join  with  him  in  conspiring 
to  elevate  himself,  at  their  own  expense.  Will  he  be 
likely  to  work  such  a  wonder  as  this?  At  any  ratey 
there  seems  to  be  the  best  barrier  against  itr  that  the 
nature  of  human  society  admits. 

The  same  general  safeguard  pervades  all  the  Judi- 
catories of  the  Presbyteran  Church.  In  all  of  them 
Ruling  Elders  have  a  place,  and  in  all  of  them,  ex- 
cepting the  General  Assembly,  the  Elders,  if  the  theory 
of  our  system  were  carried  into  perfect  execution,  would 
be  a  majority.  In  the  General  Assembly  alone,  if  com- 
pletely full,  they  would  stand  on  an  equality  in  votes 
with  the  Pastors.  And  these  Ruling  Elders  are  not 
merely  present  in  all  these  bodies.  They  mingle  in  all 
the  business;  are  appointed  on  all  committees;  and 
have  every  possible  opportunity  of  becoming  acquainted, 
in  the  most  intimate  manner,  with  all  that  is  proposed 
or  done.  There  can  be  no  concealment.  The  pro- 
ceedings of  all  our  Judicatories,  excepting  the  Church 
Session,  where  the  Elders  form  an  overwhelming  ma- 
jority, are  open  and  public  as  the  light  of  day.  And 
every  Ruling  Elder  has  at  his  disposal  a  vote  as  potent 
as  that  of  his  most  eloquent  and  learned  neighboring 
Pastor. 

It  may  be  asked,  then,  whether  there  is  not  here  a 
barrier  against  clerical  ambition  and  encroachment  as 
fixed  and  firm  as  can  well  be  conceived  or  desired?  It 
is,  undoubtedly,  a  far  more  firm  barrier  than  is  pre- 
sented by  the  popular  plan  in  use  among  our  Indepen- 


THIS    PLAN.  307 

derU  brethren.  For  as,  in  every  Church,  a  majority  of 
the  members  have  but  little  discernment,  and  are,  of 
course,  easily  influenced  and  led;  so  an  artful,  design- 
ing Pastor,  if  such  an  one  should  appear  in  a  Church 
thus  constituted,  might  generally  succeed  in  concilia- 
ting to  his  own  person  and  schemes  a  majority  of  the 
votes,  to  the  utter  discomfiture  of  the  more  wise,  pious, 
and  prudent  portion  of  the  members.  But,  upon  the 
Presbyterian  plan,  it  is  precisely  this  best  class  of  his 
Church  members  who  are  associated  with  him  in  au- 
thority and  counsel;  who  are  with  him,  ecclesiastically 
speaking,  abroad  and  at  home,  in  the  house  and  by  the 
way,  in  going  out  and  in  coming  in;  from  whose  no- 
tice he  cannot  escape,  and  without  whose  co-operation 
he  can  do  nothing.  Truly,  this  is  the  very  last  method 
that  designing,  ambitious  ministers  would  adopt  to 
forward  their  projects!  Nothing  could  be  conceived 
more  unfriendly  to  corrupt  schemes,  than  such  a  band 
of  official  colleagues.  And  accordingly,  as  we  have 
more  than  once  seen,  in  the  foregoing  chapters,  the 
honest  and  pious  old  Ambrose,  of  the  fourth  century, 
expressly  tells  us,  that  it  was  a  wish  to  get  rid  of  such 
colleagues,  on  the  part  of  the  Teaching  Elders,  that 
first  led  to  the  gradual  disuse  of  Ruling  Elders  in  the 
Church,  after  the  first  three  centuries. 

III.  Again ;  as  the  Presbyterian  plan  of  administering 
discipline  is  adapted  to  present  one  of  the  strongest  con- 
ceivable barriers  against  clerical  ambition,  so  it  also 
furnishes  one  of  the  best  securities  for  preserving 
the  rights  of  the  people.  And  here  nothing 
will  be  said  on  the  supposed  congeniality  between  the 
Presbyterian  form  of  Church  Government,  and  the 
republican,  representative  systems  under  which  we  live; 
and  the  alledged  tendency  of  the  former  to  prepare  men 


308  ADVANTAGES  OF 

for  understanding,  prizing  and  maintaining  the  latter; 
— I  say,  on  these  allegations  I  shall  not  dwell; — not 
because  I  do  not  consider  both  as  perfectly  well  founded ; 
but  because  the  discussion  might  be  deemed,  by  some 
readers,  invidious;  and  because  it  forms  no  necessary 
part  of  my  argument.  Independently  of  these  con- 
siderations, it  may  be  confidently  maintained,  that  the 
Presbyterian  plan  of  administering  discipline,  furnishes 
far  better  security  for  preserving  unimpaired  the  rights 
of  private  Christians,  than  any  plan  with  which  we  are 
acquainted.  It  is  not  forgotten  that  this  assertion  will 
appear  a  paradox  to  many;  but  it  rests,  nevertheless,  on 
the  most  solid  grounds. 

There  is  no  oppression  more  heavy,  no  tyranny 
more  unrelenting,  than  that  of  an  excited,  infuriated 
popular  assembly.  No  body  with  which  the  righis  and 
privileges  of  an  inculpated  individual  are  less  safe;. 
especially  when  headed  and  controlled  by  an  eloquent, 
artful,  and  highly  popular  Pastor,  who  has  taken  part 
against  that  individual.  Suppose,  then,  as  the  annals 
of  Independency  have  too  often  exemplified, — (hat  a 
member  is  on  trial,  for  some  alleged  delinquency,  before 
a  Church  of  that  denomination.  Suppose  the  alleged 
offence  to  be  one  which  has  deeply  alienated  from  him 
his  Pastor,  and  all  the  particular  friends  of  the  Pastor. 
Suppose  these,  as  one  man,  rise  up  against  him,  and 
resolve  to  crush  him.  And  suppose  this  Pastor  to  be  so 
generally  admired  and  beloved  by  his  people,  that  he  is 
able  to  command  an  overwhelming  majority  of  their 
votes,  in  support  of  all  his  favorite  measures.  What 
chance  would  such  an  accused  person  stand  of  an  im- 
partial trial  before  such  a  tribunal?  Not  the  smallest 
He  might  be  guilty,  indeed,  and  deserve  the  heaviest 
sentence;  but  even  if  innocent,  his  acquittal,  in  such 


THIS  PLAN.  309" 

circumstances  could  be  anticipated  by  none.  He  must 
become  the  victim  of  popular  resentment ;  and  if  he 
thus  fall,  he  has  no  remedy.  There  is  no  tribunal  to 
which  he  can  appeal.  He  must  lie  down  under  the 
oppressive  sentence.  And  there  he  must  lie  as  long  as 
he  lives.  He  cannot  regularly,  (that  is,  according  to 
that  ecclesiastical  rule  which  pre vades  all  religious  de- 
nominations) go  to  another  Church ;  for  the  supposition 
is  that  he  is  excommunicated,  and  cannot  be  recom- 
mended as  in  "good  standing"  to  any  other  ecclesiastical 
body.  He  must  submit  to  the  operation  of  the  sentence, 
however  unjust,  until  the  excited  and  impassioned  body 
which  laid  it  upon  him,  shall  be  disposed  to  relent,  and 
consent  to  remove  the  deadly  weight. 

It  is  not  denied  that  there  may  be  moments  of  pre- 
judice and  passion  in  the  Presbyterian  Church,  in  which, 
even  the  grave  and  experienced  Elders  may  be  so. 
wrought  upon  by  different  sorts  of  influence,  as  to  dis- 
pense justice  very  imperfectly,  or,  even,  in  a  particular 
case,  to  refuse  it  entirely.  But  then,  in  every  such  case, 
upon  the  Presbyterian  plan,  there  is  an  immediate  and 
perfect  remedy.  An  individual  who  supposes  himself 
wronged,  may  appeal  to  a  higher  tribunal,  where  his 
cause  will  be  heard  by  judicious,  enlightened,  impartial 
men,  who  had  no  concern  in  its  origin,  and  who,  if 
wrong  have  been  done,  may  be  expected  to  afford 
prompt  and  complete  redress.  The  oppressive  sentence 
may  be  reversed.  lie  may  be  reinstated,  in  spite  of 
popular  excitement,  in  all  his  Christian  privileges;  and 
even,  where  his  own  reluctance,  or  that  of  his  former 
connexions,  may  forbid  his  return  to  the  bosom  of  ths 
same  congregation  in  which  he  recently  received  such, 
treatment;  yet  he  may  easily  and  regularly  be  at- 
tached to  a  neighboring  one  of  the   same  denomina- 


310  ADVANTAGES  OF 

tion,  and  thus  find  the   whole  difficulty  satisfactorily 
removed. 

It  is  not  asserted,  then,  that  other  Churches,  in  the 
exercise  of  discipline,  do,  in  fact,  more  frequently  injure 
and  oppress  the  subjects  of  their  discipline  than  the 
Presbyterian  Church.  Such  an  assertion,  indeed,  might, 
perhaps,  be  made  without  invidiousness;  inasmuch  as 
decisions  formed  and  pronounced  by  the  popular  voice, 
may  be  deemed,  without  disparagement  to  the  individu- 
als who  form  them,  less  likely  to  be  wTise,  and  impartial, 
than  when  formed  by  a  select  body  of  enlightened  and 
pious  judges.  But  on  this  point  no  comparative  estimate 
will  be  attempted.  It  is  however,  confidently  asserted, 
that  when  such  wrong,  as  that  of  which  we  speak  un- 
happily occurs,  the  Presbylerian  system  affords  more 
complete  relief  from  oppression,  and.  therefore,  furnishes 
more  fixed  security  for  the  rights  of  the  people,  than  is 
found  in  any  other  denomination.  No  single  man,  in 
our  Church,  whatever  title  he  may  bear,  can, by  his  sin- 
gle, perhaps  capricious,  veto,  deprive  a  professing  Chris- 
tian of  his  privileges  as  a  Church  member;. nor  can 
it  be  done  by  a  feverish,  popular  assembly,  impelled  by 
its  own  prejudice  or  passion,  or  held  under  the  sovereign 
control  of  one  man.  The  best  array  of  piety,  wisdom, 
and  knowledge  which  the  society  affords,  must  sit  in 
judgment  in  the  case,  and  even  if  this  judicatory  should 
give  an  unjust  sentence,  the  religious  rights  of  the  in- 
dividual are  not  prostrated  or  foreclosed;  but  may  be 
reviewed  by  an  impartial  tribunal,  and  every  privilege 
which  he  ought  to  enjoy,  secured. 

IV.  Further;  the  plan  of  conducting  Church  govern- 
ment with  the  aid  of  Ruling  Elders,  secures  to  Ministers 
of  the  Word  and  Sacraments,  counsel  and  support, 

*N     ALL    THEIR    OFFICIAL    PROCEEDINGS,    OF     THE 


THIS    PLAN.  311 

best  possibe  kim).  Supposing  ministers  of  tho 
gospel  to  be  honest,  pious,  disinterested  and  zealous  in 
their  appropriate  work;  to  have  no  disposition,  at  any 
time,  to  encroach  on  the  rights  of  others;  and  to  Ik;  above 
the  reach  of  that  passion  and  prejudice,  which  are  so 
apt  to  assail  even  the  honest,  and  which  need  a  check 
in  all; — even  suppose  ministers  of  the  gospel  to  be  above 
the  reach  of  these  evils ; — still  they  need  counsel, 
information,  and  support  in  a  multitude  of  cases,  and 
cannot,  with  either  safety  or  advantage,  proceed  without 
them.  In  all  the  affairs  of  the  Church,  it  is  of  the 
utmost  importance  that  the  interests  of  the  whole  body 
be  constantly  consulted,  and  that  the  whole  body  act 
an  appropriate  pait  in  conducting  its  affairs.  As  there 
are  no  privileged  orders  to  be  aggrandized  and  eleva- 
ted; so  there  arc  no  ecclesiastical  secrets  to  be  kept ; 
no  private  or  selfish  schemes  to  be  tolerated.  The  more 
completely  every  plan  is  laid  open  to  public  view,  un- 
derstood and  appreciated  by  every  member,  sustained 
by  unanimous  and  willing  effort,  and  made  to  promote 
the  knowledge,  purity  and  order  of  the  whole — the 
better.  Of  course,  that  plan  of  ecclesiastical  regimen 
which  is  best  adapted  to  attain  these  ends,  and  to  attain 
them  in  the  most  certain,  direct,  quiet,  and  comfortable 
manner,  is  most  worthy  of  our  choice. 

Such  a  plan,  it  is  firmly  believed,  is  the  Presbyterian. 
In  every  department  of  official  duty,  the  Pastor  of  this 
denomination  has  associated  with  him,  a  body  of  pious, 
wise,  and  disinterested  counsellors,  taken  from  among 
the  people;  acquainted  with  their  views;  participating 
in  their  feelings ;  able  to  give  sound  advice  as  to  the 
wisdom  and  practicability  of  plans  which  require  general 
co-operation  for  carrying  them  into  effect;  and  able  also, 
after  having  aided  in  the  formation  of  such  plans,  to 


312  ADVANTAGES  OF 

return  to  their  constituents,  and  so  to  advocate  and 
recommend  them,  as  to  secure  general  concurrence  in 
their  favor. 

This  is  an  advantage,  strictly  speaking,  peculiar  to 
Presbyterianism.  For  although  other  forms  of  Church 
government  provide  for  associating  lay-men  with  the 
clergy  in  ecclesiastical  business :  yet,  according  to  them, 
there  is  no  divine  warrant  for  it.  It  is  a  mere  human 
expedient,  to  meet  an  acknowledged  exigency,  for 
which  those  who  make  this  acknowledgment,  suppose 
that  the  law  of  Christ  makes  no  provision.  And  the 
human  provision  which  they  thus  make,  is.  manifestly, 
liable  to  many  objections.  It  consists  either  in  consti- 
tuting the  whole  body  of  the  communicants  the  Pastoi's 
counsellors — which  is  liable  to  all  the  objections  stated 
at  large  in  a  former  chapter  ;  or,  in  providing  for  him 
a  committee,  or  small  delegation  of  lay-men,  who  may 
be  changed  every  year,  or  oftener,  and,  of  course,  may 
have  very  little  experience ;  and  in  some  Churches 
these  lay  delegates  are  not  required  to  be  communicants, 
or  even  baptized  persons:  and,  consequenly,  may  have 
no  real  ecclesiastical  responsibility  for  their  conduct. 

V.  The  method  of  conducting  discipline  under  con- 
sideration, has  also  the  advantage  on  the  score  of  des- 
patch and  energy,  as  well  as  of  wisdom  and  the 
security  of  equal  rights. 

Where  all  the  discipline  that  is  exercised  is  in  the 
hands  of  a  single  individual,  without  appeal,  it  must  be 
confessed  that,  in  this  case,  provision  for  despatch  and 
energy  cannot  be,  at  least  in  theory,  more  perfect.  But 
where  it  is  in  the  hands  of  the  whole  body  of  the  Church 
members,  there  is  no  saying  howT  long  litigation  may 
be  protracted,  or  in  what  perplexities  and  delays  the 
plainest  case  may  be  involved.     There  are  so  many 


THIS   PLAN.  313 

rnmds  to  be  consulted,  and  every  case,  upon  this  plan, 
■is  so  open  to  capricious  or  malignant  interposition,  that 
it  is  impossible,  in  ordinary  circumstances,  to  calculate 
results,  or  to  foresee  an  end. 

Even  on  the  Presbyterian  plan,  there  is  no  doubt 
that  delay  and  perplexities  may,  in  some  cases,  arise. 
But  where  the  whole  management  of  discipline,  from  its 
inceptive  steps  to  the  consummation  of  each  case,  is 
entirely  committed  to  a  select  body  of  pious,  intelligent, 
•prudent,  and  experienced  men,  accustomed  to  the  work, 
and  aware  of  the  dangers  to  which  their  course  is 
exposed,  we  may  reasonably  calculate  on  their  decisions 
being  as  speedy,  as  unembarrassed,  and  as  much  lifted 
above  the  temporizing  feebleness,  or  the  tempestuous 
irregularity  and  confusion,  incident  to  popular  manage- 
ment, as  human  infirmity  will  allow. 

VI.  The  plan  of  conducting  discipline  by  means  of 
•a  succession  of  judicatories,  admitting  of  appeal,  provides 
for  redressing  many  grievances  which  do  not  appear, 
otherwise,  to  admit  of  a  remedy.  According  to  the  In- 
dependent, or  strictly  Congregational  system,  as  sugges- 
ted in  a  preceding  page,  when  a  member  of  a  Church 
has  been  unjustly  censured  or  cast  out,  he  has  no  appeal. 
There  is  no  tribunal  to  which  he  can  apply  for  relief. 
Yet  his  case  may  be  an  exceedingly  hard  one,  loudly 
calling  for  redress.  The  cause  of  religion  in  his  neigh- 
borhood may  be  suffering  severely  by  the  situation  in 
which  he  is  placed.  Ought  there  not  to  be  some  regular 
and  adequate  method  of  meeting  and  removing  such  a 
difficulty?  In  such  of  the  Churches  of  Connecticut  as 
have  entered  into  the  plan  of  Consociational  union,  such 
a  method  has  been,  to  a  certain  extent,  provided.  But 
it  has  been  by  adopting,  to  precisely  the  same  extent,  a 
leading  principle  of  Presby  terianism.     When  difficulties 

2  D 


314  ADVANTAGES  OP 

arise  in  a  particular  Church,  a  tribunal  is  formed,  by  a 
number  of  neighboring  ministers,  together  with  one  or 
more  lay-delegates,  from  each  of  the  Churches  repre- 
sented, who  may  review,  and,  if  need  be,  redress  the 
alleged  grievance.  This  is  a  Presbyterian  feature  in 
their  system,  and,  so  far  as  it  goes,  excellent  and  effectual . 
In  the  judgement,  however,  of  the  venerable  President 
Dwight ,this  plan  is  still  defective,  and  defective  precisely 
in  the  point  at  which  it  stops  short  of  Presbyterianism, 
The  opinion  which  this  distinguished  Congregational 
Minister  has  expressed,  in  reference  to  the  subject  before 
us,  will  best  appear  by  presenting  it  in  its  connexion. 
It  is  as  follows: — 

il  There  are  many  cases  in  which  individuals  are 
dissatisfied,  on  reasonable  grounds,  with  the  judgment 
of  a  Church.     It  is  perfectly  obvious,  that,  in  a  debate 
between  two  members  of  the  same  Church,  the  parties 
may,  in  many  respects,  stand  on  unequal  ground    One 
of  them  may  be  ignorant;  without  family  connexions; 
in  humble  circumstances ;  and  possessed  of  little  or  no 
personal  influence.     The  other  may  be  a  person  of  dis- 
tinction; opulent;   powerfully  connected;    of  superior 
understanding;    and  of  great  personal  influence,  not 
only  in  the  Church,  but  also  in  the  country  at  large. 
As  things  are  in  this  world,  it  is  impossible  that  these 
persons  should  possess,  in  any  controversy  between  them, 
equal  advantages.     Beyond  all  this,  the  Church  itself 
may  be  one  party,  and  a  poor  and  powerless  member 
the  other.    In  this  case,  also,  it  is  unnecessary  to  observe, 
the  individual  must  labor  under  every  supposable  dis- 
advantage, to  which  a  righteous  cause  can  be  subjected. 
To  bring  the  parties  in  these,  or  any  similar  circum- 
stances, as  near  to  a  state  of  equality  as  human  affairs 
will  permit,  it  seems  absolutely  necessary  that  every 


THIS  PLAN.  315 

ecclesiastical  body  should  have  its  tribunal  of  appeals; 
a  superior  Judicature,  established  by  common  consent, 
and  vested  with  authority  to  issue  finally  all  those  causes, 
which,  before  a  single  Church,  are  obviously  liable  to  a 
partial  decision." 

"Such  a  tribunal,  in  all  the  New-England  States, 
except  this,  (Connecticut,)  is  formed  by  what  is  called  a 
Select  Council;  that  is  a  council  mutually  chosen  by 
the  contending  parties.     This  has  long  appeared  to  me 
a  Judicatory  most  unhappily  constituted.     The  parties 
choose,  of  course,  such  persons,  as  they  suppose  most 
likely  to  favor  themselves.     If,  therefore,  they  commit 
no  mistake  in  the  choice,  the  Council  may  be  considered 
as  divided  in  opinion,  before  it  assembles;  and  as  fur- 
nishing every  reason  to  believe,  that  it  will  not  be  less 
divided  afterwards.     Its  proceeding  will  frequently  be 
marked  with  strong  partialities ;    and  its  decision,   if 
made  at  all,  will,  not  unfrequently,  be  those  of  a  bare 
majority.     Coming  from  different  parts  of  the  country, 
it  will  have  no  common  rules  of  proceeding.     After  its 
decisions,  its  existence  ceases.  Its  responsibility  vanishes 
with  its  existence;  as  does  also  the  sense  of  its  authority. 
As  the  members  frequently  come  from  a  distance,  it  can 
have  no  knowledge  concerning  those  numerous  parti- 
culars, which  respect  the  transactions  to  be  judged  of; 
and  the  characters,  interests,  views  and  contrivances  of 
those  who  are  immediately  concerned.     As  individuals, 
these  members   may,  in  some  instances,  have  much 
weight ;  and  in  certain  circumstanes,  may,  by  their 
wisdom  and  piety,  do  much  good.     But  all  this  must 
arise  solely  from  their  personal  character.    As  a  Council, 
as  a  judicatory,  they  can  scarcely  have  any  weight  at 
all;  for  as  they  disappear  when  the  trial  is  ended,  they 
are  forgotten  in  their  united  character ;  and  having  no 


316  ADVANTAGES   OF 

permanent  existence,  are  regarded  with  no  habitual 
respect,  and  even  with  no  prejudice  in  their  favor.  Very 
often,  also,  as  they  are  chosen  on  partial  principlesr 
they  are  led,  of  course,  to  partial  decisions;  and  leave 
behind  them  very  unhappy  opinions  concerning  eccle- 
siastical government  at  large." 

"In  this  state,  {Connecticut.)  a  much  happier  mode 
has  been  resorted  to,  for  the  accomplishment  of  this  ob- 
ject. The  tribunal  of  appeal  is  here  a  Consociation  : 
a  standing  body,  composed  of  the  settled  Ministers  within 
anassociationaldistrict,andDelegates  from  the  Churches 
in  the  same  district;  a  body  always  existing;  of  ac- 
knowledged authority:  of  great  weight;  possessed  of  all 
the  impartiality  incident  to  human  affairs;  feeling  its 
responsibility  as  a  thing  of  course;  a  Court  of  Record, 
having  a  regular  system  of  precedents;  and,  from  being 
frequently  called  to  business  of  this  nature,  skilled,  to  a 
good  degree,  in  the  proper  modes  of  proceeding." 

"The  greatest  defect  in  this  system,  as  it  seems  to 
me,  is  the  want  of  a  still  superior  tribunal,  to 

RECEIVE     APPEALS,     IN   CASES   WHERE    THEY    ARE 

obviously  necessary.  These,  it  is  unnecessary  for 
me  to  particularize.  Every  person  extensively  acquain- 
ted with  ecclesiastical  affairs,  knows  that  such  cases 
exist.  The  only  remedy  provided  by  the  system  of 
discipline  established  in  this  State,  for  those  who  feel 
aggrieved  by  a  Consociational  judgment,  is  to  introduce 
a  neighboring  Consociation,  as  assessors  with  that  which 
has  given  the  judgment,  at  a  new  hearing  of  the  cause. 
The  provision  of  this  partial,  imperfect  tribunal  of  appeals, 
is  clear  proof,  that  those  who  formed  the  system,  perceived 
the  absolute  necessity  of  some  appellate  jurisdiction.  The 
judicatory  which  they  have  furnished  of  this  nature,  is 
perhaps  the  best,  which  the  Churches  of  the  State, 


THIS   PLAN.  317 

would  at  that,  or  any  succeeding  period,  have  consented 
to  establish.  Yet  it  is  easy  to  see  that,  were  they 
disposed,  they  might  easily  institute  one  which 

WOULD  BE   INCOMPARABLY  BETTER." 

"The  only  instance  found  in  the  Scriptures  of  an 
appeal,  actually  made  for  the  decision  of  an  ecclesiastical 
debate,  is  that  recorded  in  the  fifteenth  chapter  of  the 
Acts,  and  mentioned  for  another  purpose  in  a  former 
discourse.  A  number  of  the  Jews  in  the  Church  at 
A?ilioch,  insisted  that  the  Gentile  converts  should  be 
circumcised  and  be  obliged  to  keep  the  law  of  Moses. 
Paul  and  Barnabas  strenuously  controverted  this  point 
with  them.  As  no  harmonious  termination  of  the  debate 
could  be  had  at  Antioch.  an  appeal  was  made  "to  the 
Apostles  and  Elders  at  Jerusalem"  But,  as  I  observed, 
in  the  discourse  mentioned,  it  was  heard  and  determined 
by  the  Apostles,  Elders  and  Brethren.  As  this  judicatory 
was  formed  under  the  direction  of  the  Apostles  them- 
selves, it  must  be  admitted  as  a  precedent  for  succeeding 
Churches;  and  teaches  us,  on  the  one  hand,  than  an 
appellate  jurisdiction  is  both  lawful  and  necessary  in  the 
Church;  and,  on  the  other,  that  it  is  to  be  composed  of 
both  Ministers  and  Brethren,  necessarily  acting,  at  the 
present  time,  by  delegation."* 

In  this  quotation,  and  in  the  remarks  which  preceded 
it,  a  reference,  it  will  be  perceived,  is  principally  had  to 
cases  in  which  individual  private  members  have  con- 
sidered themselves  as  aggrieved  by  the  decisions  of 
particular  Churches.  But  the  same  remarks,  in  sub- 
stance, are  applicable  to  those  cases  in  which  difficulties 
arise  between  Ministers  and  their  Congregations,  or 
between  two  neighboring  Congregations  of  the  same 


*  Theology  Explained  and  Defended,  Vq\.  iv.  399—401. 

2d2 


318-  ADVANTAGES  OP 

name.  No  form  of  Church  government  provides  for 
the  settlement  of  such  difficulties  so  promptly  or  so  well* 
as  the  Presbyterian.  Independency,  strictly  so  called;- 
that  is  Independency,  in  strict  adherence  to  its  eessentiaf 
principles,  furnishes,  for  such  evils,  no  remedy  whatever. 
Other  sects  furnish  a  nominal  or  partial  remedy,  by 
investing  some  official  individual  with  power  to  con- 
stitute a  tribunal  for  settling  such  controversies.  But 
the  choice  of  the  members  of  this  tribunal  is  usually 
committed  entirely  to  that  individual,  and  it  is,  of  course, 
in  his  power  to  make  it,  like  a  "packed  jury,"  in  the 
hands  of  a  corrupt  returning  officer,  a  mere  instrument 
of  oppression.  But,  in  the  Presbyterian  Church,  every 
difficulty  of  this  kind  is  committed,  for  adjustment,  to  a 
permanent,  responsible  body;  a  body  whose  proceedings 
may  be  reviewed  and  examined;  whose  organization 
or  memb3rs  cannot  be  changed  at  the  will  cf  a  corrupt 
individual,  who  may  choose  to  tamper  with  them;  and 
whose  decisions  are  not  merely  adviscry,  but  authori- 
tative0 

VII.  Finally;  the  Presbyterian  method  of  conducting 
the  government  of  the  Church,  is  most  friendly  to  the 
spread  of  the  gospel,  and  furnishes  peculiar  facili- 
ties FOR  UNION  AND  EFFICIENCY  OF  ACTION,  IN. 
PROMOTING  THE  GREAT  OBJECTS  OF-  CHRISTIAN 
BENEVOLENCE. 

It  has  been  sometimes,  indeed,  alleged,  in  opposition 
to  this,  that  Presbyterianism  is,  naturally,  and  almost 
necessarily,  cold  and  formal;  and  that  Congregational- 
ism has  been  found,  in  fact,  more  favorable  to  zeal  and 
activity  in  spreading  the  gospel  It  is  by  no  means  in- 
tended to  depreciate  either  the  zeal  or  the  activity  of  our 
Congregational  Brethren.  Justice  demands  that  much- 
be  said  in,  commendation  of  both.     And.  it  wilL  be  no 


THIS   PLAN  319 

small  praise  to  any  other  denomination  to  be  found 
successfully  emulating  the  intelligence,  enterprise  and 
perseverance  which  they  have  often  manifested  in 
pursuing  the  best  interests  of  the  Redeemer's  kingdom. 
But  when  the  organization  of  the  Presbyterian  Church 
is  examined,  one  would  think  that  pfejudice  itself  could 
scarcely  deny  its  peculiar  adaptedness  for  united,  har- 
monious, and  efficient  action,  in  every  thing  which  it 
might  become  convinced  was  worthy  of  pursuit. 

In  order  to  enable  this  Church*  to  act  with  the  utmost 
energy  and  uniformity,  throughout  its  entire  extent, 
there  is  no  need  of  any  new  organization.     It  is  orga- 
nized already,  and  in  a   manner,  as  would  seem,  as 
perfect  as  possible  for  united  and  harmonious  action. 
A  delegation   from   every  Church,  meet  and   confer, 
several  times  in  each  year,  as  a  matter  of  course,  in 
Presbytery.      What    opportunity   could    be    imagined 
more  favorable   for   forming   and   executing  plans  of 
co-operation,  among  all  the  Churches  thus  united,  and, 
statedly  convening?     They  have  the  same  opportunity, 
and  every  advantage,  of  meeting  at  pleasure,  that  can 
be  enjoyed  by  a  voluntary  association;  with  the  addi- 
tional advantage,  thai,  they  act  under  a  system  of  eccle- 
siastical   rules    and  authority,  which  enable  them  to 
go  forward  with  more  energy  and  uniformity  in  their 
adopted  course.     If  a  more  extended  union  of  Presby- 
terian Churches  than  of  those  which  belong  to  a  single 
Presbytery,  be  desired,  for  any  particular  purpose,  the 
regular  meetings  of  the-  Synods,  each  comprising  a 
number  of  Presbyteries,  afford  the  happiest  opportunity, 
without  any  new  or  extra  combination,  of  effecting 
the  object.     The  representatives  of,  perhaps,  one  hun- 
dred and  fifty  Churches,  assembled  in  their  ecclesiastical 
capacity,  and  in  the  name  of  Christ,  could  hardly  be 


320  ADVANTAGES  OF 

conceived  to  convene  in  circumstances  more  perfectly 
favorable  to  their  co-operating,  in  any  worthy  and  hal- 
lowed cause,  with  one  heart,  and  with  the  most  perfect 
concentration  of  effort.  And  when  we  extend  our 
thoughts  to  the  General  Assembly,  the  bond  of  union, 
counsel  and  co-operation  for  more  than  two  thousand 
Churches,  all  represented,  and  combined  in  the  same 
cause;  we  see  a  plan  which,  in  theory  at  least,  it  would 
seem  difficult  to  adapt  more  completely  to  union  of  heart 
and  hand  in  any  good  work.  The  most  admirable 
combination,  with  every  possible  advantage,  exists  be- 
forehand. Nothing  is  in  any  case,  wanting,  but  the 
animating  Spirit  necessary  for  applying  it  to  the 
proper  objects.  The  machinery,  in  all  its  perfection, 
is  already  constructed,  and  ready  to  be  set  in  motion, 
Only  let  the  impelling  principle,  which  is  necessary  to 
set  all  moral  combinations  into  vigorous  movement,  be 
present,  and  operate  with  due  power,  and  it  may  be 
asserted,  that  a  more  advantageous  system  for  ecclesi- 
astical enterprise  was  never  devised. 

It  is  not  a  sufficient  reply  to  this  statement  to  say, 
that  the  Congregational  Churches  of  New-England, 
have,  in  fact,  done  more  within  the  last  thirty  years,  in 
the  way  of  contribution  and  effort,  for  extending  the 
Redeemers  kingdom,  than  any  equal  number  of 
Churches  of  the  Presbyterian  denomination  in  the 
United  States.  It  is  impossible  to  contemplate  the  in- 
telligence, harmony  of  feeling,  and  pious  enterprise  of 
the  mass  of  our  Congregational  Brethren,  without  sen- 
timents, at  once,  of  respect  and  gratitude.  But  is  not 
the  general  fact  alluded  to,  chiefly  referable  to  other 
causes  than  the  form  of  their  Church  government?  No 
one,  it  is  believed,  can  doubt,  for  a  moment,  that  this  is 
the  case.    Their  Church  government  is,  manifestly,  less 


THIS    PLAW.  321 

adapted  to  promote  union  and  effective  co-operation, 
than  most  others.  But  their  intelligence,  their  piety, 
their  common  origin,  their  homogenous  character,  th 
compact  situation,  and  the  sameness  of  the  instruction, 
the  excitements,  and  the  agencies  which  thej  enjoy, 
have  all  tended  to  prepare  them  for  united  and  har- 
monious co-operation.  Only  give  to  the  members  of 
Churches  organized  on  the  Presbyterian  plan,  the  same 
advantages;  the  same  natural  principles  of  cohesion j 
the  same  intellectual  and  moral  stimulants:  and  the 
same  pervading  spirit:  -and  can  any  one  believe  that 
there  would  be  found  less  union,  and  less  energy  in 
pursuing  the  best  interests  of  man-  We  must  deny 
the  connexion  between  cause  and  effect,  before  we  can 
doubt  that  there  would  be  more  of  both.  It  has  been 
sometimes,  indeed,  said,  as  a  supposed  exemplification 
of  the  unfavorable  influence  of  Presbyterianism,  that 
the  Churches  called  Presbyterian,  in  South  Britain 
have  generally  declined,  both  in  orthodoxy  and  piety, 
within  the  last  hundred  years:  while  the  Independents 
have  generally  and  happily  maintained  their  character 
for  both.  But  the  fact  is,  that  when  the  English  Pres- 
byterians gradually  lell  into-  those  errors,  for  .which  the 
greater  part  of  them  are  now  distinguished,  they,  at  the 
same  time,  gradually  renounced  the  Presbyterian  form 
of  government,  although  they  retained  the  name 
There  are  not  now,  and  have  not  been,  for  many  years, 
any  real  Presbyterians  in  England,  excepting  those 
who  are,  directly  or  indirectly,  connected  with  Churches 
in  Scotland.  Viler  all,  it  is  not  pretended  that  the 
Presbyterian  form  of  Church  government  can,  of  itself>. 
infuse  spiritual  life  and  activity  into  an  ecclesiastical 
body;  but  that  where  vitality,  and  zeal,  and  resources 
exist,  there  is  no  form  of  ecclesiastical  organization  iu 


322  ADVANTAGES   OF 

the  world  so  well  adapted  to  unite  counsels,  and  invi- 
gorate efforts,  as  that  under  which  we  are  so  happy  as 
to  live. 

It  makes  no  part,  however,  of  the  design  of  the 
author  of  this  volume  to  assail,  or  to  depreciate  the 
ecclesiastial   order  of  other  denominations.     On    the 
contrary,  wherever  he  finds  those  who  evidently  bear 
the  image  of  Christ,  and  who  appear  to  be  engaged  in 
advancing  his  kingdom,  whatever  form  of  Church  or- 
der they  may  prefer,  he  can  hail  them  with  unqualified 
affection  as  Christian  Brethren.    The  truth  is,  he  would 
not  have  alluded  to  any  other  portion  of  the  Christian 
Church  than  that  with  which  he  is  more  immediately 
connected,  had  it  appeared  possible,  without  doing  so? 
fully  to  illustrate  the  character  and  advantages  of  oui 
own  form  of  governmet.     His  ardent  wish  is,  not  to 
alienate,   by  high  claims,  or  unkind  language ;    but 
rather  to  conciliate  and  bind  together  by  every  thing 
that   can  minister  to  brotherly  love.     And  his  daily 
prayer  is,  that  all  the  Evangelical  Churches  in  our  land 
may  be  more  and  more  united  in  principle  and  effort, 
for  extending  that  "kingdom  which  is  not  meat  and 
drink,  but  righteousness  and  peace  and  joy  in  the  Holy 
Ghost." 


FINIS. 


Princeton  Theolog 


cal  Seminary-Speer  Library 


1    1012  01112  7729 


Date 

Due 

SE    3 '54 

§1 

•irtQft 

m^ 

)  ^  w 

Lj 

WA >. 

. 

*uut 

9 

tm 


